JK 

2295 
M52 
M5 


LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY  OF 

CALIFORNIA 

IRVINE 


J\C 


Ms 


JOHNS  HOPKINS  UNIVERSITY  STUDIES 

IN 

HISTORICAL  AND  POLITICAL   SCIENCE 

Under  the  Direction  of  the 

Departments  of  History,  Political  Economy,  and 
Political  Science 


VOLUME  XXXV 


BALTIMORE 

THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  PRESS 
1917 


COPYRIGHT  1917  BY 
THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  PRESS 


PRESS  OF 

THI  NEW  ERA  PRINTINS  CONMMV 
LANCASTER.  PA. 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

I.  THE  VIRGINIA  COMMITTEE  SYSTEM  AND  THE  AMERICAN  REV- 
OLUTION.   By  J.  M.  Leake  I 

II.  THE  ORGANIZABILITY  OF  LABOR.    By  W.  O.  Weyf orth 159 

III.  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  AND  MACHINERY  IN  MICHIGAN  SINCE 

1890.    By  A.  C.  Millspaugh  437 


PARTY  ORGANIZATION  AND  MACHINERY 
IN  MICHIGAN  SINCE  1890 


SERIES  xxxv  No.  3 

JOHNS  HOPKINS  UNIVERSITY  STUDIES 

IN 

HISTORICAL  AND  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

Under  the  Direction  of  the 

Departments  of  History,  Political  Economy,  and 
Political  Science 


BY 


ARTHUR  CHESTER  MILLSPAUGH,  PH.D. 
Professor  of  Political  Science  in  Whitman  College 


BALTIMORE 

THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  PRESS 
1917 


COPYRIGHT  1917  BY 
THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  PRESS 


PRESS  OF 

TNC  NEW  ERA  PRINTING 
LANCASTER.  PA. 


CONTENTS 

Page 

PREFACE vii 

CHAPTER      I.     Introduction 9 

CHAPTER     II.     Party    Committees,    Primaries,    and 

Conventions,  1890-1904 25 

CHAPTER  III.     Direct  Primary  Legislation 56 

CHAPTER    IV.     The  Committee  System  under  Direct 

Primaries 77 

CHAPTER  V.  Direct  Nominations  in  Operation.  ...  91 
CHAPTER  VI.  Campaign  Management  and  Finance .  126 
CHAPTER  VII.  Conclusions 169 


PREFACE 

A  study  of  party  organization  which  aims  to  be  of  any 
value  must  necessarily  follow  in  a  limited  field  and  perhaps 
with  more  intensive  methods  the  instructive  lines  laid 
down  by  Professor  Macy  in  his  Party  Organization  and 
Machinery.  In  the  present  investigation,  however,  I  have 
attempted  to  cover  a  period  of  time  long  enough  to  bring 
to  light  whatever  tendencies  may  be  at  work  and  to  show 
somewhat  definitely  the  effects  of  legislation. 

My  study  is  an  attempt  to  contribute  to  the  satisfying  of 
what  is  believed  to  be  a  real  need  in  applied  political  science. 
It  is  confined  to  one  State,  and  States  differ  in  their  internal 
conditions  and  in  their  legislative  experimentation;  but  I 
believe  there  is  nothing  so  peculiar  in  the  conditions  and 
legislation  of  Michigan  that  its  experience  may  not  be 
accepted  as  fairly  typical  of  the  experience  of  many  other 
States. 

I  regret  that,  on  account  of  my  inability  to  secure 
adequate  data  on  events  in  Michigan  since  September  I, 
1916,  my  study  must  lack  the  timeliness  and  the  complete- 
ness which  might  have  been  afforded  by  an  examination  of 
the  primary  vote  and  expenditure  of  1916,  the  campaign  of 
1916,  and  the  legislation  of  1917. 

Parts  of  this  study  have  appeared  in  somewhat  different 
form  in  the  following  articles:  "  Bi-Partisanship  and  Vote 
Manipulation  in  Detroit,"  in  the  National  Municipal 
Review,  Vol.  V,  No.  4,  October,  1916;  "  The  Operation  of 
the  Direct  Primary  in  Michigan,"  in  the  American  Political 
Science  Review,  Vol.  X,  No.  4,  November,  1916;  and 
"  Direct  Primary  Legislation  in  Michigan,"  in  the  Michigan 
Law  Review,  Vol.  XV,  No.  I,  November,  1916. 

Numerous  political  leaders  of  Michigan  have  contributed 
by  correspondence  or  in  interviews  valuable  information 
which  would  have  been  procurable  from  no  other  sources, 

vii 


Vlll  PREFACE 

and  to  these  men  grateful  acknowledgment  is  made.  I  am 
especially  indebted  to  Homer  Warren,  D.  J.  Campau, 
Charles  Moore,  and  Pliny  W.  Marsh,  of  Detroit,  H.  E. 
Thomas,  E.  C.  Shields,  and  D.  E.  Alward,  of  Lansing,  F.  O. 
Eldred  of  Ionia,  G.  L.  Shipman  of  Kalamazoo,  and  S.  W. 
Beakes  of  Ann  Arbor. 

For  inspiration  and  helpful  criticism  I  am  especially  in- 
debted to  Professor  W.  W.  Willoughby,  at  whose  suggestion 
the  study  was  undertaken  and  under  whose  direction  it  has 
been  completed. 

A.  C.  M. 


PARTY  ORGANIZATION  AND  MACHINERY 
IN  MICHIGAN 


CHAPTER  I 
INTRODUCTION 

As  a  preliminary  to  a  study  of  party  organization  in 
Michigan  it  seems  desirable  to  review  briefly  the  social, 
economic,  religious,  and  political  conditions  in  the  State; 
for  these  conditions  make  the  background  and  affect  the 
form  and  the  workings  of  party  organizations. 

The  population  of  Michigan  in  1890  was  2,093,890,  and 
in  1910,  2,810,173. l  In.  !89O  the  population  per  square 
mile  was  36.4;  it  had  increased  in  1910  to  48.9.  The  dis- 
tribution of  the  population  has  never  been  uniform.  In 
1904,  for  example,  the  population  of  the  southern  counties 
was  84.79  Per  square  mile;  of  the  central  counties,  51.43;  of 
the  northern  counties,  22.16;  and  of  the  upper  peninsula, 
only  16.53.  There  are  no  large  cities  in  the  northern  half 
of  the  State.  The  urban  population  of  Michigan  has 
increased  from  34.9  per  cent  of  the  total  in  1890  to  47.2 
per  cent  in  1910.  Detroit,  the  chief  city  of  the  State,  had 
in  1890  205,876  people.  Twenty  years  later  its  population 
had  more  than  doubled,  containing  over  one  sixth  of  the 
voting  population  of  the  State.  Grand  Rapids,  the  second 
city,  had  in  1910  a  population  of  112,571.  No  other  city 
in  the  State  is  half  so  large  as  Grand  Rapids. 

Of  the  citizens  born  outside  of  Michigan,  New  York  has 
furnished  more  than  any  other  State.  In  1850  two  thirds 
of  such  citizens  had  come  from  the  Empire  State;  in  1890 

1  Statistics  of  population  are  taken  from  the  decennial  United  States 
Census  Reports,  and  from  the  Michigan  Census  Reports.  The  latter 
are  prepared  in  the  fourth  year  of  each  decade. 

9 


IO  PARTY   ORGANIZATION    IN   MICHIGAN  [446 

almost  one  half;  and  as  late  as  1900  over  one  third.2  Eleven 
of  the  twenty-three  governors  of  Michigan  were  born  in 
New  York.3 

Foreign-Born. — The  foreign-born  population  in  1890  was 
25-97  Per  cent  of  the  total,  about  the  same  percentage  as 
in  Rhode  Island,  Massachusetts,  or  New  York.  In  1910 
the  percentage  was  21.2.  In  general,  with  the  exception 
of  Wayne  County,  in  which  the  city  of  Detroit  is  located, 
the  foreign-born  have  been  most  numerous  in  the  northern 
counties.  In  1894,  for  example,  approximately  three  fourths 
of  the  voters  in  the  upper  peninsula  were  foreign-born;  in 
the  mining  town  of  Ironwood  the  foreign-born  males  of 
voting  age  outnumbered  the  native-born  five  to  one,  in 
Iron  Mountain  six  to  one,  and  in  Ishpeming  ten  to  one.  In 
the  upper  peninsula  in  1910  the  percentage  of  foreign-born 
in  some  counties  was  as  high  as  fifty  and  in  none  was  lower 
than  twenty-five;  on  the  other  hand  in  the  counties  of 
Hillsdale  and  Eaton  in  the  lower  peninsula  the  percentage 
was  less  than  five.  In  Wayne  County,  which  constitutes 
an  exception  in  the  lower  peninsula,  the  foreign-born4 
amounted  in  1890  to  fifty-five  per  cent  of  the  potential 
voting  population  and  in  1910  to  forty-eight  per  cent. 

Since  1890  the  Canadians  have  always  formed  the  largest 
racial  group  among  the  foreign-born.5  They  have  been 
most  numerous  in  the  eastern  counties  of  the  lower  penin- 
sula and  in  the  upper  peninsula.  Numerically  the  Germans 
rank  second,6  and  the  English  third.  The  Irish,  holding 
first  place  in  1870,  had  become  in  1910  a  relatively  unim- 
portant group.  The  Dutch  are  numerous  in  the  western 
counties ;  the  Swedes,  next  in  importance,  are  found  largely 
in  the  upper  peninsula  and  in  the  counties  of  Muskegon  and 
Kent  in  the  lower.  The  Slavs  are  steadily  increasing  in 
number,  going  to  Detroit  and  Grand  Rapids,  to  the  lum- 

J  See  also  D.  F.  Wilcox,  "Municipal  Government  in  Michigan  and 
Ohio,"  in  Columbia  University  Studies,  vol.  v,  no.  3,  p.  21. 

1  Detroit  Free  Press,  July  I,  1894;  Who's  Who  in  America. 

4  Excluding  aliens. 

8  In  1910  the  Canadians  constituted  28.7  per  cent  of  the  total 
foreign-born  population. 

*  In  1910  the  Germans  amounted  to  22.1  per  cent  of  the  total. 


447]  INTRODUCTION  1 1 

bering  counties  of  the  lower  peninsula,  and  to  the  lumbering 
and  mining  counties  of  the  upper  peninsula.7  In  the  copper 
counties  of  Keweenaw  and  Houghton  they  outnumber  any 
other  racial  group.  It  is  somewhat  encouraging  to  note 
that  almost  three  fourths  of  the  foreign-born  in  Michigan 
in  1910  were  from  Canada,  the  United  Kingdom,  Germany, 
Holland,  and  Sweden.  The  negro  has  never  been  an  im- 
portant social  or  political  factor  in  Michigan.  He  has 
constituted,  since  1890,  less  than  one  per  cent  of  the  total 
population. 

Illiteracy  is  one  of  the  most  marked  characteristics  of  the 
foreign-born,  and  politically  appears  to  be  one  of  the  most 
serious.  In  Detroit  in  1910  the  percentage  of  illiteracy 
among  the  foreign-born  males  of  voting  age  was  12.4; 
among  the  native,  0.4  per  cent.  In  the  county  of  Gogebic 
in  the  upper  peninsula  with  its  large  foreign  element  the 
rate  of  illiteracy  among  the  males  of  voting  age  in  1894  was 
eighteen  per  cent.  In  1910  the  rate  of  illiteracy  in  the 
upper  peninsula  had  fallen,  but  it  was  still  much  higher  than 
the  general  rate  for  the  State.8 

It  will  be  observed,  therefore,  that  the  southern  part  of 
Michigan  differs  radically  from  the  northern  part,  and 
especially  from  the  upper  peninsula,  with  respect  to  density 
of  population,  the  foreign-born  element  in  the  population, 
and  illiteracy.  The  two  parts  of  the  State  show  an  indus- 
trial dissimilarity  equally  marked.  The  upper  peninsula 
is  devoted  to  the  exploitation  of  its  rich  copper,  iron,  and 
lumber  resources,  and  its  industry  is  dominated  by  great 
corporations.  On  the  other  hand  the  economic  character- 
istics of  the  southern  half  of  the  lower  peninsula  are  much 
like  those  of  northern  Ohio  and  Indiana.  Socially  and 
economically  strangers  to  each  other,  the  two  sections  of 
the  State  are  absolutely  separated  geographically. 

Party  Composition. — Passing  from  the  characteristics  of 
the  State  to  the  complexion  of  its  political  parties,  we 
observe  that  in  their  economic  make-up  the  major  parties 

7  The  Slavic  groups  were  numerically  third  in  1910. 

8  The  rate  for  the  State  was  5.9  in  1890  and  3.3  in  1910. 


12  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [448 

have  changed  considerably  since  1890.  Early  in  the  in- 
dustrial history  of  the  State  the  lumbermen  were  found  in 
the  Democratic  party;  latterly,  the  election  returns  indicate 
that  they  are  voting  for  Republican  candidates.9  In  1890 
a  Republican  majority  among  the  farmers  was  partially 
balanced  by  a  Democratic  majority  among  the  workingmen 
of  the  cities;  but  since  then  the  farmers  have  become  less 
hidebound  Republicans,  and  the  Democrats  have  lost  their 
hold  on  the  labor  vote.  Since  the  Civil  War  a  large  pro- 
portion of  the  men  of  wealth  in  the  State  have  been  in  the 
Republican  party;  and  in  1896  most  of  the  wealthy  men 
still  active  in  the  Democratic  organization  changed  their 
party  allegiance.10 

The  racial  composition  of  the  two  parties  has  also  altered. 
In  1890  most  of  the  Irish  were  Democratic;  now,  not  so 
many.11  A  similar  change  of  allegiance  has  occurred  among 
the  Germans.12  The  Dutch  have  generally  enlisted  in 
Republican  ranks,  and  they  are  still  found  almost  to  a  man 
in  that  party.13  The  same  seems  to  be  true  of  the  Scandi- 
navians.14 A  majority  of  the  later  immigrants  appear  to 
become  Republicans;  in  the  northern  part  of  the  State 
this  is  possibly  due  to  the  fact  that  these  foreigners  have 
fallen  under  the  political  tutelage  of  the  great  mining  and 
lumbering  corporations,  which  have  usually  supported  the 
Republican  candidates.15  This  tendency  of  the  later  im- 
migrants to  join  the  Republican  party  accounts  in  part  for 
the  increase  of  Republican  strength  among  the  Roman 
Catholics,  who  early  in  the  period  were  generally  Demo- 
cratic. 

Religion,  objectively  considered,  has  been,  at  least  since 
1895,  a  negligible  factor  in  Michigan  politics.  The  Ameri- 
can Protective  Association,  organized  to  oppose  the  nomi- 

» H.  M.  Dilla,  "The  Politics  of  Michigan,  1865-1878,"  in  Columbia 
University  Studies,  vol.  xlvii,  no.  I,  p.  237. 

10  Detroit  Free  Press,  March  5,  July  30,  August  I,  September  20, 
1896;  Detroit  Tribune,  August  16,  1896,  August  u,  1898. 

11  Detroit  Tribune,  July  26,  1886,  and  interviews. 

12  Dilla,  232;  Detroit  Tribune,  April  4,  1895;  and  interviews. 

13  Interviews. 

14  Detroit  Free  Press,  October  29,  1886. 

15  Interviews. 


449]  INTRODUCTION  13 

nation  and  election  of  Roman  Catholics  to  public  office, 
was  reported  in  1895  to  have  a  membership  in  the  State  of 
125,000.  It  endorsed  particular  candidates  in  local  and 
state  elections,  and  used  its  influence  in  party  primaries 
and  conventions  to  secure  the  nomination  of  Protestants. 
It  appears  to  have  had  some  success  in  Republican  gather- 
ings; but  Democratic  platforms,  naturally,  repeatedly  de- 
nounced it. 

The  third-party  movements  in  the  nineties,  phases  of  the 
economic  unrest  which  had  found  expression  in  the  Green- 
back and  Union  Labor  parties,  affected  both  party  organ- 
izations and  especially  the  Democratic.  Between  1890 
and  1 892  independent  political  action  was  either  undertaken 
or  discussed  by  a  National  Greenback  Labor  Party  of 
Michigan,16  the  Patrons  of  Industry,17  the  State  Farmers' 
Alliance  and  Industrial  Union,  and  the  Industrial  party.18 
Out  of  these  various  unstable  elements  crystallized  the 
People's  party,  which  held  its  first  state  convention  in 
Michigan  in  i892.19  In  1894  it  polled  over  thirty  thousand 
votes.  In  1896  the  Silver  Republicans  effected  a  state 
organization  and  entered  into  an  alliance  with  the  Demo- 
crats and  the  Populists,  the  three  organizations  adopting  a 
joint  name,  Democratic-People's-Union  Silver  Party,  which 
was  retained  until  1901.  In  the  meantime  the  Gold 
Democrats  were  in  actual  though  not  nominal  alliance  with 
the  Republicans.  In  the  secret  history  of  these  ephemeral 
organizations  the  leaders  of  the  major  parties  played  an 
important  although  not  easily  ascertainable  part.  The 
Republicans  gave  financial  assistance  for  several  years  to 
the  Middle-of-the-Road  Populists;  and  Republican  and 
Democratic  wire-pullers  were  active  in  third-party  con- 
ferences and  conventions. 

16  Detroit  Free  Press,  July  26,  1890. 

17  According  to  the  secretary's  figures,  their  membership  in  Michigan 
in  1891  was  70,059  (Detroit  Tribune,  March  9,  1891).     See  also  ibid., 
July  16,  1890,  February  26,  28,  March  21,  1891;  Detroit  Free  Press, 
February  27,  July  22,  30,  1890. 

18  Detroit  Free  Press,  August  i,  1890,  February  20,  1891;  Detroit 
Tribune,  July  18,  August  i,  24,  1890,  February  20,  1891. 

19  Detroit  Free  Press,  June  17,  1892. 


14  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [450 

The  sale  and  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  has  exerted  a 
most  important  influence  on  the  functioning  of  party  or- 
ganizations, because  it  constitutes  at  once  an  economic 
interest  with  a  peculiar  liability  to  be  affected  by  legislation 
and  administration;  a  social  influence,  with  power  to  reach 
directly  and  sway  to  its  purposes  an  extraordinary  number 
of  voters;  and,  finally,  a  potential  political  influence,  with 
the  possibility,  by  its  moral  appeal,  of  causing  radical  re- 
alignments in  the  rank  and  file  of  parties.  Saloon  men  have 
been  pretty  generally  Democrats,  with  a  recognized  tend- 
ency, however,  to  shift  their  votes  and  influence  according 
to  their  own  interests.20  In  the  late  eighties,  therefore, 
when  the  Prohibition  party  was  growing  in  voting  strength 
and  seemed  to  be  drawing  followers  from  the  Republican 
party,  this  third-party  movement  was  looked  upon  with 
favor  by  the  Democrats  and  was  feared  by  their  opponents.21 
Since  1890,  when  the  Prohibitionists  attained  their  greatest 
relative  strength  with  a  vote  amounting  to  7.2  per  cent  of 
the  total  vote,  they  have  been  a  negligible  factor  in  elec- 
tions. But  the  liquor  problem  remained,  and  the  saloon  in- 
fluence preserved  its  contact  with  the  party  organizations. 

Party  Strength. — Since  1890  an  increasing  majority  of  the 
partisan  newspapers  of  the  State  have  supported  the 
Republican  party.  Of  679  periodicals  of  all  descriptions 
which  were  published  in  1890,  209  were  independent,  201 
were  Republican,  and  117  were  Democratic.  In  1914  the 
independent  newspapers  had  increased  to  288,  the  Repub- 
lican to  235,  and  the  Democratic  had  dwindled  to  29.  In 
1890  there  were  23  independent  dailies,  19  Republican,  and 
14  Democratic.  Twenty-four  years  later  the  independent 
dailies  had  increased  to  45,  and  the  Republican  to  22,  but 
the  Democratic  had  fallen  to  5.  In  1890  fourteen  counties 
had  no  Democratic  local  newspapers.  Nine  of  these 
counties  had  Republican  papers  only,  and  there  were 
Republican  papers  in  every  county  that  had  periodicals  of 
any  kind.  In  1914  the  Republicans  had  press  represen- 

20  Interviews.  In  the  election  of  November,  1916,  Michigan  adopted 
state-wide  prohibition. 

"Dilla,  pp.  91,  169;  Detroit  Tribune,  July  4,  17,  August  27,  1886. 


45 1  ]  INTRODUCTION  15 

tatives  in  all  but  one  of  the  counties;  but  the  Democrats 
lacked  an  editorial  spokesman  in  fifty-three  of  the  eighty- 
three  counties.22 

The  history  and  the  traditions  of  the  Republican  party  of 
Michigan  have  been  positive  elements  of  strength.  The 
State  boasts  of  having  held  the  first  Republican  convention. 
During  and  after  the  Civil  War  the  party  had  in  Zachariah 
Chandler  a  strong-minded  and  strong-willed  leader  of 
national  influence.  The  Republicans  had  been  perfectly 
organized  when  the  Democrats  were  demoralized  and 
without  a  leader.23  Long  after  the  war  the  best  people  of 
the  State  were  usually  Republican.24  It  was  not  until  after 
the  election  in  1890  of  the  Democrat  Winans,  who  had  been 
denounced  as  a  Copperhead,  that  the  old  vote-getting 
shibboleths  of  the  war  era  were  generally  abandoned.25 

Election  returns  show  that  Michigan  is  normally  Re- 
publican. Between  1854  and  1912  the  Republican  candi- 
date for  governor  was  defeated  but  twice :  by  a  Fusionist  in 
1882  and  by  a  Democrat  in  1890.  Under  abnormal  con- 
ditions in  1912  a  Democratic  governor  was  elected;  and 
under  equally  abnormal  conditions  he  was  reelected  in 
1914.  A  Democratic  candidate  for  president,  however,  has 
not  carried  the  State  since  1852.  Even  in  1912,  when 
Roosevelt  received  a  plurality  of  sixty  thousand  over  Taft, 
the  greatly  reduced  Republican  vote  in  Michigan  still 
exceeded  the  Democratic  by  one  thousand.  Between  1894 
and  1910  the  Republican  vote  has  never  been  less  than 
fifty- two  per  cent  of  the  total  vote,  and  in  1904  it  was  as 
high  as  sixty-nine  per  cent.  In  the  legislature  of  1891  the 
Democrats  had  a  majority  in  both  houses.  Since  then 
they  have  never  secured  a  majority  in  either  house,  and  in 

22  Lists  of  newspapers  are  contained  in  the  Official  Directory  and 
Legislative  Manual  of  the  State  of  Michigan.     Many  papers,  of  course, 
that  call  themselves  independent  are  in  effect  either  Republican  or 
Democratic.     A    prominent     Democrat    believes    that    independent 
actually  means  Republican.     Moreover,  counties  with  no  Democratic 
papers  are  not  without  the  circulation  of  Democratic  opinion. 

23  Dilla,  p.  254. 

24  Interviews. 

25  Detroit  Tribune,  September  12,  October  14,  22,  1890,  February 
10,  14,  22,  1891. 


1 6  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [452 

1905  the  legislature  was  all  Republican.  Between  1890  and 
1912  the  Democrats  have  at  no  time  controlled  both  na- 
tional and  state  administrations;  and  during  most  of  that 
time  they  have  controlled  neither.  The  Republicans, 
therefore,  have  practically  monopolized  political  patronage. 

The  Republican  vote,  moreover,  is  evenly  distributed. 
In  1904  and  1908  the  Republican  candidate  for  president 
carried  every  county  in  the  State;  and  in  1900  and  1906  the 
Democrats  carried  only  one.26  Wayne  County,  the  chief 
urban  center,  appeared  to  be  normally  Democratic  prior 
to  1894,  but  it  has  since  given  the  Republican  state  and 
national  tickets  increasing  majorities.  The  upper  peninsula 
is  a  Republican  stronghold  with  overwhelming  majorities  at 
every  election.  The  Democrats  did  not  carry  a  single 
county  in  that  section  at  a  state  or  national  election  between 
1894  and  1912.  The  safe  Republican  majority  may  account 
in  part  for  the  fact  that  Michigan,  since  the  birth  of  the 
Republican  party,  has  never  had  a  presidential  candidate, 
and  since  i88827  has  had  no  important  aspirant  for  a 
presidential  nomination. 

Leadership. — Along  with  advantages  of  patronage  and 
wealth,  the  Republican  party,  at  least  until  1902,  had  the 
advantage  of  superior  leadership.  During  this  time  the 
undisputed  head  of  the  party  was  James  McMillan,  a  multi- 
millionaire of  Detroit,  who  was  elected  United  States 
Senator  in  1889  and  retained  the  office  until  his  death  in 
1902.  He  succeeded  Zachariah  Chandler  as  chairman  of  the 
Republican  state  central  committee  in  1879;  and  in  1886 
was  again  elected  to  the  same  office.  In  1896,  when  he 
resigned  the  nominal  management  of  the  party  organization 
while  retaining  the  actual  control,  he  had  been  connected 
with  the  central  committee  for  twenty  years  and  had  been 
its  chairman  for  ten  years, — a  longer  period  than  fell  to  the 

26  St.  Joseph  in  1900  and  Cass  in  1906. 

27  In  the  Republican  national  convention  in  1888  R.  A.  Alger,  a 
former  governor  of  Michigan,  and  later  secretary  of  war  and  senator, 
received  84  votes  on  the  first  ballot  and  143  on  the  fifth  (Proceedings 
of  the  Republican  National  Convention,  1888,  p.  134).      The  election 
of  1916  has  not  necessitated  any  modification  of  the  above  statements. 


453]  INTRODUCTION  IJ 

lot  of  any  of  his  predecessors  or  successors.28  He  almost 
never  made  speeches  and  rarely  came  into  direct  relations 
with  the  workers  of  his  party,  but  he  used  money  effectively, 
and  was  skillful  in  the  choice  of  his  subordinates  and  in  the 
distribution  of  patronage.  Tactful  and  conciliatory,  he 
usually  came  to  terms  with  his  enemies,  and  he  did  not 
interfere  in  state  contests  unless  his  own  prestige  or  position 
seemed  involved.29  He  was  a  boss;  but,  to  use  the  words  of 
one  of  his  assistants,  he  was  perhaps  the  "easiest  boss  that 
Michigan  ever  had." 

Differing  in  almost  every  respect  from  McMillan  and 
other  Republican  leaders  of  the  nineties,  Hazen  S.  Pingree 
was  the  most  picturesque  state  leader  of  the  time.  He  was 
mayor  of  Detroit  during  four  terms.  In  spite  of  his  lack 
of  education — his  speeches  were  written  for  him  and,  unless 
he  lost  control  of  himself,  were  read  verbatim — his  wealth, 
his  homely  personality,  his  original  methods,  his  radical 
policies,  and  his  attacks  on  bosses  won  for  him  a  large 
following  outside  of  Detroit  and  secured  for  him  a  firm  hold 
on  the  organization  in  Wayne  County.  Defeated  by  the 
machine  in  1892  and  1894,  he  finally  secured  the  Republican 
nomination  for  governor  in  1896.  Though  his  support  by 
the  organization  was  lukewarm,  he  ran  ahead  of  his  ticket. 
In  1898  he  was  in  absolute  control  of  the  state  convention 
and  the  new  central  committee,  and  was  renominated  and 
reelected,  again  running  ahead  of  his  ticket.  Had  he  been 
well  educated  and  had  he  been  wise  in  the  choice  of  his 
political  advisors,  he  might  have  threatened  Senator 
McMillan's  leadership.  As  it  was,  he  is  noteworthy  in  the 
history  of  party  organization  for  his  early  and  vigorous 
advocacy  of  direct  nominations,  for  his  denunciation  of 
bosses  and  corporations,  and  for  his  frank  championship  of 

28  Detroit  Tribune,  December  10,  1894,  April  24,  1896. 

29  "The  keynote  of  his  political  leadership  .  .  .  was  executive  abil- 
ity— rare  discrimination  in  the  selection  of  assistants  and   consum- 
mate skill  in  handling  them "  (Detroit  Tribune,  August  n,  1902). 


1 8  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [454 

independent  voting.  He  was  the  first  of  the  Michigan 
insurgents.30 

On  the  death  of  Senator  McMillan  in  1902  the  Republican 
organization  was  left  without  a  leader.  Strong  factional 
feeling  developed,  and  in  several  counties  local  bosses 
appeared  who  were  able  to  make  their  power  felt  in  the 
state  organization.31  In  the  meantime,  the  so-called  pro- 
gressive sentiment  was  growing  in  the  Republican  ranks. 
The  election  of  W.  A.  Smith  as  senator  in  1907,  of  Townsend 
to  succeed  Burrows  in  1910,  and  of  Osborn  to  the  governor- 
ship in  1910  gave  definite  indication  of  new  ideas  and  new 
methods. 

The  leader  of  the  Democratic  organization  in  1890  was 
Don  M.  Dickinson,  a  Detroit  lawyer,  who  had  been  post- 
master-general in  Cleveland's  first  administration.  The 
chairman  of  the  state  central  committee,  however,  was 
D.  J.  Campau,  also  of  Detroit;  and  in  1892  Mr.  Campau 
became  national  committeeman  as  well  as  state  chairman. 
With  the  beginning  of  the  cleavage  in  the  Democratic 
party  between  the  gold  and  silver  elements,  accentuated 
in  Michigan  by  a  dispute  over  the  distribution  of 
patronage,32  Mr.  Campau  put  himself  at  the  head  of  the 
radical  faction  and  Mr.  Dickinson  led  the  administrationists. 
Mr.  Dickinson  controlled  the  state  delegate  convention  in 
1896;  but  the  victory  of  the  silver  forces  in  the  national 
convention  and  the  unseating  of  several  of  the  gold  delegates 
from  Michigan  delivered  the  state  organization  into  the 
control  of  Mr.  Campau.  From  this  time  until  1908  Mr. 
Campau  was  national  committeeman  and  dominated  the 
state  organization.  He  was  a  close  friend  of  Mr.  Bryan, 
an  industrious  party  worker,  an  organizer  of  some  ability, 

30  Detroit  Tribune,  February  2,  1895,  March  13,  May  26,  November 
6,  1896,  April  10,  1897,  September  21,  November  7,  9,  1898;  F.  E. 
Haynes,  Third  Party  Movements  since  the  Civil  War,  pp.  408-410; 
J.  F.  Hogan,  ed.,  The  History  of  the  National  Republican  League  of 
the  United  States,  pp.  360-364;  and  interviews. 

31  The  most  powerful  of  these  local  bosses  were  Tom  Navin  of  Wayne, 
Tip  Atwood  of  Tuscola,  Bill  Judson  of  Washtenaw,  and  Link  Avery  of 
St.  Clair.     In  1904  Atwood  was  said  to  be  in  control  of  the  state  or- 
ganization (Detroit  Tribune,  July  23,  1904). 

32  See  below,  pages  28-29. 


455]  INTRODUCTION  19 

and,  above  all,  a  man  of  wealth  who  was  believed  by  his 
followers  to  be  generous  in  the  financial  support  of  his  party.33 
He  never  held  an  elective  office.34 

In  1901  the  Democrats  returned  to  their  old  party  name, 
having  practically  absorbed  the  Populists  and  the  Silver 
Republicans.35  In  1904  the  state  organization  of  the  Gold 
Democrats  was  abandoned,  and  many  of  the  conservatives 
again  became  conspicuous  at  Democratic  gatherings.  The 
party  organization,  however,  grew  steadily  weaker.  In 
1908  the  organization  was  captured  by  a  conservative 
group  of  leaders  who  are  still  in  control.36  The  Progressive 
movement  and  the  resulting  split  in  the  Republican  party 
placed  a  Democrat  in  the  governorship  in  1912,  and  the 
holding  of  this  office,  with  the  direct  primary,  has  consider- 
ably strengthened  the  Democratic  organization. 

Legal  Status  of  Party  Organizations. — Prior  to  1887  the 
legislature  and  the  supreme  court  of  Michigan  were  reluc- 
tant to  recognize  political  parties  or  to  interfere  in  their 
internal  affairs.  In  People  v.  Hurlbut  the  supreme  court 
declared  unconstitutional  an  act  of  1871"  which  provided 
for  a  board  of  public  works  in  Detroit,  the  members  to  be 
taken  from  the  two  political  parties.  The  party  composi- 
tion of  the  board  was  criticized  by  the  court,  but  the  uncon- 
stitutionally of  the  act  was  based  on  other  grounds.38  An 

33  His  enemies,  however,  accused  him  of  fostering  a  financial  myth, 
and  declared  that  his  large  campaign  contributions  were  not  actually 
his,  but  were  funds  derived  from  other  sources. 

34  On  the  political  activities  of  Mr.  Campau  and  Mr.  Dickinson  see 
News,  January  10,  April  28,  1886;  Detroit  Tribune,  April  22,  1892, 
July  31,  1896,  June  22,  25,  August  10,  1898;  Detroit  Free  Press,  Sep- 
tember 7,  1886,  June  22,  1894,  July  6,  August  14,  26,  September  6, 
1896;  Proceedings  of  the  National  Democratic  Convention,  1900,  p. 
264;  Legislative  Souvenir  and  Political  History  of    Michigan,  p.  59. 

35  Detroit  Tribune,  March  6,  9,   1901.      The  Middle-of -the- Road 
Populists,    however,    maintained    an    organization    until    1909.     The 
Silver  Republican  organization  practically  ceased  to  exist  in  1900. 

36  October  I,  1916. 

37  3  Session  Laws,  1871,  p.  273. 

38  24  Mich.  44  (1871).     Justice  Christiancy  said:   "This  act,  there- 
fore— the  first  ever  brought  to  my  knowledge,  which  has  attempted 
to  recognize  parties  as  permanent — if  it  intended  that  their  identity 
should  be  determined  by  anything  more  than  the  mere  name  of  the 
organization  to  which  an  individual  might  profess  to  belong,  has  at- 
tempted a  mere  impossibility."     Justice  Cooley  declared  the  provision 


2O  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN  [456 

act  of  1885  providing  for  a  board  of  election  commissioners 
in  Detroit  to  be  appointed  from  the  two  leading  political 
parties  was  held  unconstitutional  because,  among  other 
reasons,  it  prescribed  a  political  test  for  the  holding  of 
office.39  In  1887,  however,  a  law  was  passed  which  not 
only  recognized  parties  but  prescribed  optional  regulations 
for  the  control  of  conventions  and  ward  primaries;40  and 
in  1889  the  first  of  the  secret  voting  acts41  was  passed,  these 
acts  again  involving  the  recognition  and  regulation  of 
parties.  The  legal  regulation  of  party  primaries  and  of 
elections  was  extended  in  subsequent  legislation  and  was 
upheld  by  the  supreme  court.  Legal  control  of  the  ballot 
early  brought  before  the  court  cases  involving  the  validity 
of  nominations.  In  Shields  v.  Jacobs  (1891),  a  case  arising 
from  a  split  convention,  the  court  decided  that  it  was  not 
the  province  of  the  board  of  election  commissioners  to 
determine  the  regularity  of  a  party  convention,  but  that 
both  tickets  nominated  should  go  on  the  ballot.42 

In  accordance  with  this  decision,  an  opinion  of  the  at- 
torney-general the  following  year  declared  that  it  was  the 
duty  of  the  board  of  election  commissioners  to  print  all 
tickets  duly  certified  by  the  chairman  and  the  secretary  of 
the  committee  of  a  political  organization.43  In  1894,  how- 
ever, the  court  itself  reviewed  the  proceedings  of  a  party 
convention  and,  in  the  light  of  party  custom,  decided  as  to 
the  regularity  and  validity  of  its  nomination.44  The  leading 
Michigan  case,  however,  is  that  of  Stephenson  v.  Board  of 

as  to  appointment  from  parties  nugatory  "because  the  Legislature,  on 
general  principles,  have  no  power  to  make  party  affiliation  a  qualifica- 
tion for  office." 

39  Attorney-General  v.   Detroit  Common   Council,  58   Mich.   213. 
Justice  Campbell  said :  "  But  parties,  however  powerful  and  unavoidable 
they  may  be,  and  however  inseparable  from  popular  government,  are 
not  and  cannot  be  recognized  as  having  any  legal  authority  as  such. 
The  law  cannot  regulate  or  fix  the  numbers,  or  compel  or  encourage 
adherence  to  them." 

40  Public  Acts  and  Joint  and  Concurrent  Resolutions  of  the  Legis- 
lature of  the  State  of  Michigan,  1887,  No.  303.     Cited  as  Public  Acts. 

41  Public  Acts,  1889. 
«  88  Mich.  164. 

43  Annual  Report  of  the  Attorney-General  of  the  State  of  Michigan, 
1892,  p.  213. 

44  Beck  v.  Board  of  Election  Commissioners,  103  Mich.  192. 


457]  INTRODUCTION  21 

Election  Commissioners,  in  which  the  nominee  of  a  rump 
convention  claimed  a  place  on  the  official  ballot.  The  court 
pointed  out  that  the  usual  remedy  against  injustice  in  con- 
vention procedure 

has  been  either  a  bolt  on  the  part  of  the  dissatisfied,  and  the  selection 
of  an  opposition  candidate  within  the  party,  or  a  refusal  by  the  electors 
to  support  the  nominee;  and  the  courts  have  been  careful  not  to  inter- 
fere with  the  application  of  these  remedies  which  have  usually  been 
found  adequate  .  .  .  and  when  a  considerable  faction  of  a  convention 
leaves  the  meeting,  and  nominates  a  ticket,  claiming  to  be  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  party  which  called  the  convention,  it  is  not  the  province 
of  the  courts  to  determine  upon  technical  grounds  that  it  is  not,  and  that 
its  action  is  void,  and  deny  it  a  place  upon  the  ballot,  thereby  defeating 
the  purification  of  methods  within  the  party,  or  to  say  which  faction 
was  right  and  which  wrong.  .  .  .  The  electors  must  decide  between 
them." 

The  above  doctrine  was  reaffirmed  in  1904  in  Jennings  v. 
Board,  the  court  holding  that,  in  the  absence  of  fraud,  the 
determination  of  a  political  convention  as  to  who  are  its 
nominees  is  final,46  and  in  1907  in  Potter  v.  Deuel,  when  the 
court  declared  that  the  composition  of  a  committee  accord- 
ing to  the  custom  and  usage  of  the  party  with  the  sanction 
of  the  party  conventions  would  not  be  disturbed  by  the 
courts.47  In  the  following  year,  in  Burns  v.  Board,  the 
court  decided  that  the  relator,  who  had  received  six  of  the 
eleven  votes  in  a  regularly  constituted  convention,  was 
entitled  to  a  place  on  the  regular  Republican  ticket  rather 
than  the  respondent,  who  had  received  five  votes  in  a 
seceding  body.48  The  policy  of  the  Michigan  supreme  court, 
therefore,  appears  to  have  been  in  general  to  refuse  to 
decide  controversies  between  claimants  to  a  nomination  for 
the  reason  primarily  that  such  controversies  are  extremely 
difficult  to  adjudicate,  and,  when  making  an  exception,  to 
decline  to  go  back  of  party  usage  or  the  determination  of  a 
regularly  constituted  convention. 

Neither  the  legislature  nor  the  courts  of  Michigan  have 

46  118  Mich.  396.  See  also  Baker  v.  Board,  no  Mich.  635  (1896). 
"The  reluctance  of  the  courts  to  enter  upon  an  inquiry  .  .  .  into  the 
question  of  fact  as  to  which  of  two  contending  factions  truly  represents  a 
political  party,  has  been  manifested  in  various  cases." 

46  137  Mich.  720  (1904). 

47  149  Mich.  393  (1907). 

48  154  Mich.  471  (1908). 


22  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN  [458 

undertaken  to  frame  a  precise  definition  of  party  organiza- 
tions. The  attorney-general  was  of  the  opinion  that  the 
words  "political  organization"  or  "political  party"  as 
used  in  the  general  election  law  of  1891  "must  be  construed 
to  mean  any  respectable  body  of  citizens  who  are  electors 
of  any  township  or  election  district,  and  who  assemble 
themselves  together  in  the  manner  provided  by  the  law,  and 
hold  a  nominating  caucus  or  convention."49  In  Chateau  v. 
Board,  the  supreme  court  said  that  a  nomination  for  alder- 
man "ought  to  represent  the  wishes  of  a  respectable  portion  " 
of  the  electors  of  the  ward  "in  order  to  entitle  the  ticket, 
as  a  distinct  party  ticket,  to  be  printed  upon  the  ballot."50 
The  attorney-general  said: 

I  apprehend  that  what  the  court  means  by  a  respectable  body  of  "such 
electors"  must  depend  very  largely  upon  the  number  of  voters  in  the 
district  where  the  candidate  is  to  be  nominated.  For  instance,  if  there 
were  three  hundred  voters  in  the  ward,  ten  voters  could  not  be  said  to 
be  any  respectable  portion  of  the  electors  of  the  ward,  and  unless  the 
caucus  or  convention  was  called  by  giving  public  notice  so  that  all  the 
people  of  the  ward  or  district  might  be  notified,  I  hardly  think  that  a 
board  of  election  commissioners  would  be  criticized  for  refusing  to 
accept  a  ticket  when  they  knew  that  it  only  represented  a  secret  caucus, 
attended  by  less  than  five  per  cent  of  the  voters  of  the  ward.61 

General  Features. — When  party  organizations  were  free 
from  legal  control  and  later  with  respect  to  matters  not  regu- 
lated by  law,  the  form  and  the  working  of  the  organizations 
were  determined  by  rules  adopted  by  the  parties  themselves 
and  by  custom.  The  organization — in  general  outline  the 
two  parties  were  alike — was  based  on  the  political  sub- 
divisions of  the  State.  There  was  a  party  committee  for 
the  State  as  a  whole,  for  the  county,  for  the  city,  for  the 
congressional  district,  for  the  senatorial  district,  for  the 
representative  district,  for  the  judicial  circuit,  for  the  ward, 
and  for  the  township.  In  general  each  of  these  political 
subdivisions  had  its  own  convention  or  primary.  In  cam- 
paigns the  organization  frequently  extended  into  the  pre- 
cincts and  the  school-districts  The  organization  in  each 
political  subdivision  was  considered  in  theory  to  be  an 

49  Report  of  Attorney-General,  1892,  p.  181. 

50  50  N.  W.  Rep.  102. 

61  Report  of  Attorney-General,  1892,  pp.  206-207. 


4591  INTRODUCTION  23 

independent  organization,  not  only  with  respect  to  the 
organizations  in  other  subdivisions,  but  also  with  respect  to 
the  state  organization ;  and  the  state  organization  was  con- 
sidered to  be  independent  of  the  national  organization.52 

Within  the  State  and  within  each  subdivision  the  highest 
authority  was  considered  to  be  the  party  convention;  but 
on  most  matters,  and  especially  on  those  which  were  most 
pressing,  the  party  committee  took  decisive  action.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  however,  written  rules  were  rarely  adopted 
even  by  the  state  central  committees.  The  written  rules 
of  the  Republican  state  central  committee  seem  never  to 
have  been  complete,  and  the  Democratic  state  central 
committee  does  not  appear  ever  to  have  adopted  written 
rules  of  any  kind.53  The  practice  of  the  organizations  was 
determined  almost  wholly  by  custom.  In  quiet  times  and 
quiet  places  custom  was  likely  to  continue  uninterrupted 
for  many  years.  On  account  of  the  looseness  of  the  party 
confederation  we  find  in  the  various  subdivisions  a  puzzling 
variety  of  practices.  Probably  no  two  counties  were  at  any 
time  alike  in  every  detail  of  form  and  procedure.  Republi- 
can practice  in  one  county  will  be  found  to  resemble  Dem- 
ocratic practice  in  another,  and  both  may  differ  from  the 
practice  of  either  party  in  a  third  county. 

Except  in  the  nominating  process,  there  was  no  permanent 
arrangement  for  the  coordination  or  subordination  of  the 
various  organizations,  although  in  practice  these  cooperated 
with  each  other  and  with  the  state  organization.  Sometimes 
the  organizations  of  two  or  more  subdivisions  were  con- 
solidated;54 sometimes  the  functions  of  one  organization 
were  assumed  by  another.55  The  relations  of  the  organiza- 
tion of  one  subdivision  with  that  of  another  depended  on 
custom,  on  expediency,  on  geography,  on  the  local  political 
situation,  and  especially  on  the  ability  and  the  temper  of 
the  party  officials.  In  general  the  good  of  one  organization 

52  Interviews. 

63  Interviews. 

64  As  in  Wayne  and  Kent  counties,  where  the  county,  city,  and  con- 
gressional committees  were  sometimes  consolidated. 

55  As  in  the  case  of  representative  and  senatorial  district  committees. 


24  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [460 

was  felt  to  be  the  good  also  of  the  others;  and  the  recognition 
that  unity  was  essential  to  success  was  itself  unifying.  The 
state  leaders,  moreover,  were  usually  also  local  leaders;  and 
below  the  surface  there  were  invisible  influences  which 
always  worked  for  a  centralized  and  comprehensive  control. 
The  existence  of  this  invisible  element  in  party  control 
makes  difficult  a  real  understanding  of  the  dynamics  of  the 
organization. 

Party  battles  in  Michigan  have  been  fought  on  two  elec- 
tion dates:  the  first  Monday  in  April,  and  the  first  Tuesday 
after  the  first  Monday  in  November.  In  April  occurs  the 
election  of  township  and  village  officers,  most  city  officers, 
the  justices  of  the  supreme  court,  the  regents  of  the  uni- 
versity, the  circuit  judges,  since  1903  the  county  commis- 
sioners of  schools,  and  since  1909  the  superintendent  of 
public  instruction,  the  State  Board  of  Education,  and  the 
State  Board  of  Agriculture.  At  the  biennial  election  in 
November  have  been  chosen  all  other  elective  state  officers, 
in  most  counties  the  remaining  county  officers,  members  of 
Congress,  and,  quadrennially,  presidential  electors.  Party 
organization  has  been  most  complete  and  most  active  prior 
to  the  fall  election,  and  more  complete  and  more  active  in 
presidential  than  in  off  years.  The  spring  election,  although 
it  has  not  been  taken  out  of  politics  as  was  intended,  is 
chiefly  important  for  the  fact  that  it  is  the  first  state  election 
in  the  United  States  following  a  presidential  campaign. 


CHAPTER  II 

PARTY  COMMITTEES,  PRIMARIES,  AND  CONVENTIONS, 
1890-1904 

Committees. — The  ward  committee  usually  consisted  of 
three  members.1  Legislation  in  1895,  however,  necessitated 
in  Detroit  a  committeeman  in  each  voting  precinct,  to  be 
elected  at  the  first  precinct  primary  for  a  term  of  one  year.2 
The  ward  committee  exercised  almost  complete  control 
over  the  conduct  of  primaries,  but  its  campaign  duties 
tended  to  gravitate  into  the  hands  of  the  city  or  county 
committee.8  Its  officers  were  a  chairman,  a  secretary,  and 
sometimes  a  treasurer.4  The  township  committee  consisted 
ordinarily  of  three  members,  who  were  elected  at  the  first 
township  primary  in  the  spring  and  who  served  for  one 
year;5  the  committeeman  first  elected  usually  acted  as 
chairman.6 

The  county  committee,  the  most  important  local  party 
organ,  was  usually  made  up  of  one  member  from  each  ward 
and  township,  and  these  ward  and  township  representatives 
were  elected  at  the  county  convention,  which  in  most  cases 
confirmed  caucus  selections  by  ward  and  township  dele- 
gations.7 Sometimes,  however,  the  county  convention 
decided  that  the  chairmen  of  the  ward  and  township  com- 
mittees should  make  up  the  county  committee.8  The  com- 
mittee ordinarily  served  two  years,  and  the  customary 

1  Detroit  News,  August  19,  1912;  Detroit  Free  Press,  October  28, 
1894;  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  May  9,  1902. 

2  Local  Acts  of  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of  Michigan,  1895,  No. 
411.     Cited  as  Local  Acts. 

3  Detroit  Free  Press,  October  II,  1892,  July  u,  1906. 

4  Ibid.,  March  18,  1891,  February  15,  1899. 

5  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  March  10,  22,  1900. 

6  Detroit  Tribune,  March  15,  1888,  and  interviews. 

7  Detroit  Tribune,  August  22,  1886;  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  August 
25,  1898,  May  16,  August  3,  1902. 

8  Ann  Arbor  Argus-Democrat,  August  22,  1902,  and  interviews. 

25 


26  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [462 

officers  were  a  chairman,  a  secretary,  and  a  treasurer,  with 
sometimes  a  vice-chairman  and  an  assistant-secretary.  In 
Wayne  County  the  chairman  was  often  selected  by  the 
committee  itself,  in  other  counties,  usually  by  the  county 
convention;  but  in  many  cases  he  was  actually  named  by 
the  candidates9  or  by  a  dominant  clique  or  a  boss.  There 
was  usually  an  executive  committee,  consisting  of  five, 
seven,  or  nine  members,  appointed  by  the  chairman,  and  of 
this  sub-committee  the  chairman  and  the  secretary  were 
usually  ex-officio  members  and  officers.10  The  county  com- 
mittee usually  held  a  meeting  for  organization  immediately 
after  its  selection  by  the  county  convention;  but  meetings 
in  general  were  infrequent  except  during  campaigns  and 
were  usually  secret.11 

The  county  committee  was  an  essential  element  of  the 
party  mechanism,  and  its  control  formed  the  chief  issue  in 
many  factional  fights.  The  office  of  chairman  entailed 
work  and  sacrifice,  and  it  was  generally  filled,  especially  in 
the  Republican  organization,  by  energetic  and  able  men 
who  were  often  repeatedly  reelected.12  In  recommending 
the  appointment  of  postmasters  Senator  McMillan  sought 
and  usually  followed  the  suggestions  of  the  county  chairmen. 
"When  people  complained  about  an  appointment,"  said  one 
of  the  senator's  former  assistants,  "we  told  them  that,  if 
they  were  dissatisfied,  their  business  was  to  select  a  new 
county  chairman."  The  members  of  the  committee  were 
often  disinclined  or  were  unable  to  meet  and  act,  and  ex- 
pressly or  tacitly  authorized  the  chairman  to  transact 
practically  all  of  the  business.  While  engaged  in  the 
service  of  the  party  he  often  availed  himself  of  the  oppor- 
tunity to  build  a  personal  machine,  the  finished  product  of 

•As  in  Kent  County.  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  June  18,  i892,;May 
16,  1902;  Detroit  Tribune,  August  15,  1886,  July  15,  1890. 

10  Detroit  Tribune,  October  10,  1894,  October  23,  1902;  Detroit 
Free  Press,  September  23,  1890.  In  1899  the  Wayne  County  Repub- 
lican Executive  Committee  consisted  of  the  chairman,  the  secretary, 
the  treasurer,  and  fifteen  other  members  (Detroit  Free  Press,  February 
9,  1899). 

1  For  an  exception  see  Detroit  Free  Press,  February  12,  1899. 

n  Detroit  Tribune,  April  16,  1904. 


463]    PARTY  COMMITTEES,  PRIMARIES,  AND  CONVENTIONS     27 

which,  in  the  Republican  party,  was  usually  an  appointive 
or  elective  office. 

At  the  head  of  the  state  organization  stood  the  state 
central  committee,  with  general  supervision  over  other 
organizations  in  so  far  as  they  participated  in  the  nomina- 
tion and  the  election  of  state  officers.  It  named  new 
district  committees  when,  on  account  of  legislative  reap- 
portionments  or  for  other  causes,  the  regularly  chosen  com- 
mittees had  become  defunct.13  It  decided  on  the  party 
name  and  vignette.14  During  the  period  1890-1904  the 
constitution  of  the  two  central  committees  was  the  same: 
two  members  from  each  congressional  district,  and  four 
officers  who  were  usually  selected  from  outside  the  com- 
mittee.15 The  members  of  the  committee  were  chosen 
biennially,  in  presidential  years  at  the  first  state  convention. 
A  caucus  of  district  delegates  meeting  just  before  the  state 
convention  selected  the  two  district  members  of  the  com- 
mittee, and  the  caucus  selection  was  confirmed  by  the  state 
convention.  Reelections  were  common.16  The  committee 
filled  its  own  vacancies.17  Apparently  no  provision  existed 
for  the  removal  of  members  or  of  officers;  but,  as  far  as  I 
can  learn,  there  were  no  removals.18 

The  officers  of  the  state  central  committee  were  a  chair- 
man, a  vice-chairman,  a  secretary,  and  a  treasurer.  The 
chairman  was  customarily  selected  by  the  state  convention.- 
Delegates  frequently  made  the  attempt  in  conventions  to 
leave  the  selection  of  a  chairman  to  the  committee ;  this  was 
done  by  the  Democrats  in  1904  and  possibly  in  1894.  From 
1890  to  1904  the  Republicans  had  four  chairmen,  the  Dem- 

13  Detroit  Free  Press,  March  2,  1892;  Detroit  Tribune,  March  2,  5, 
1892;  Proceedings  of  the  Republican  National  Convention,  1892,  p.  n. 

14  As  was  done  by  the  Democratic  central  committee  in  1896  and 
1901,  in  the  latter  year  after  authorization  by  the  state  convention 
(Detroit  Tribune,  March  6,  1901). 

16  In  1892  an  unsuccessful  attempt  was  made  to  enlarge  the  Repub- 
lican central  committee  to  three  members  from  each  district  (ibid., 
April  14,  15,  1892). 

16  One  member  in  1903  had  served  for  fourteen  years  (ibid.,  January 
20,  1903). 

7  Ibid.,  October  19,  1888. 

18  Ibid.,  September  19,  June  22,  1898,  August  26,  1904;  Detroit 
Free  Press,  June  29,  September  7,  20,  1894. 


28  PARTY   ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN  [464 

ocrats  six.  In  the  selection  of  a  state  chairman  wealth 
was  a  desideratum,  for  in  the  absence  of  dependable  revenue 
the  incumbent  had  to  bear  unexpected  burdens  and  pay 
expected  deficits.  Of  the  ten  chairmen  of  this  period  four 
were  reputed  millionaires;  five  of  them  were  lawyers,  and 
five  were  from  Detroit.  Most  of  them  were  at  one  time  or 
another  aspirants  for  public  office.  The  secretary  was 
usually  the  personal  choice  of  the  chairman,  although  form- 
ally chosen  in  most  cases  by  the  committee.  The  Repub- 
lican secretary  for  many  years  was  paid  a  salary,19  and  he 
devoted  most  of  his  time  to  the  work  of  organization;  but 
the  Democratic  secretary  received  payment  only  while 
engaged  in  campaign  activities.  The  chairman  appointed 
an  executive  committee  to  which  the  central  committee 
delegated  many  of  its  powers,  the  membership  of  this  sub- 
committee varying  from  six  to  eleven.  There  were  two 
regular  meetings  of  the  central  committee,  in  presidential 
years  three:  a  meeting  for  organization  immediately  after 
its  selection,  and  a  meeting  just  before  each  state  convention 
to  pass  on  the  credentials  of  delegates.  The  chairman  called 
other  meetings  at  his  discretion.  Proceedings  of  the  com- 
mittee were  usually  secret,  but  were  often  attended  by  can- 
didates and  other  party  leaders.  According  to  newspaper 
reports,  the  first  open  meeting  of  a  state  central  committee 
was  in  1898  when  the  Republicans  held  a  public  session.20 
The  national  committeeman  was  theoretically  the  rep- 
resentative in  the  State  of  the  national  organization  and  a 
connecting  link  between  the  two  organizations.  The  office 
was  considered  to  be  the  prerogative  of  wealthy  men,  es- 
pecially of  men  willing  to  contribute  generously  to  campaign 
funds.  In  the  Democratic  organization,  which  differed  in 
this  respect  from  the  Republican,  the  national  committee- 
man  was  considered  to  be  more  important  than  the  state 
chairman,  because  in  the  minority  party  the  national 
committeeman  was  expected,  in  the  event  of  party  success, 
to  be  the  distributor  of  federal  patronage.  From  1892  to 

19  $1200  to  $1500. 

M  Detroit  Tribune,  October  5,  1898. 


465]    PARTY  COMMITTEES,  PRIMARIES,  AND  CONVENTIONS     2Q 

1896,  however,  Mr.  Campau,  who  was  national  committee- 
man  and  was  in  control  of  the  state  organization,  was 
opposed  to  the  administration;  accordingly  the  leader  of 
the  administrationists  in  the  State,  Mr.  Dickinson,  selected 
a  number  of  referees  in  various  parts  of  the  State  who  rec- 
ommended Democrats  for  appointment.  This  arrange- 
ment intensified  the  opposition  of  the  radical  wing  of  the 
party,  which  regarded  Mr.  Dickinson's  methods  as  opposed 
to  "the  rights  and  authority  of  the  regular  party  organiza- 
tion."21 

In  the  congressional  district  committees  there  was  much 
variety  with  respect  both  to  number  of  members  and  method 
of  selection,  the  committee  very  commonly  consisting  of 
one  member  from  each  of  the  counties  in  the  district,  chosen 
by  the  congressional  district  convention.22  The  officers  were 
usually  chosen  by  the  committee  or  by  the  candidate;  and 
in  the  first  district,  which  coincided  with  Wayne  County,  it 
appears  to  have  been  the  custom  for  the  candidate  to  name 
the  entire  committee, — as,  in  fact,  he  frequently  did  in 
other  counties.23 

The  senatorial  district  committee  consisted  usually  of 
three  or  five  members,  or  of  one  member  from  each  of  the 
subdivisions  of  the  senatorial  district.  The  representative 
district  committee  was  similarly  constituted;  but  in  the 
cities  the  city  committee  usually  acted  as  a  representative 
district  committee,  and  in  some  counties  the  county  com- 
mittee performed  that  function.  The  judicial  circuit  com- 
mittee was  in  general  unimportant;  it  called  judicial  con- 
ventions, and  in  some  circuits  managed  the  campaigns  of 
candidates  for  circuit  judge. 

The   city   committee,    composed   of   representatives   of 

21  Detroit  Tribune,  September  12,  1894;  Detroit  Free  Press,  June 
25,  1894. 

22  Detroit  Tribune,  July  9,  1902,  May  30,  1902;  statements  in  Michi- 
gan Department  of;State.     For  other  apportionments  see  Grand  Rapids 
Herald,  May  2,  1900,  September  17,  1902. 

23  Grand    Rapids    Herald,    September    I,    1904;    Detroit    Tribune, 
October  u,  1892,  September  13,  1900;  Detroit  Free  Press,  March  10, 
1908.     In  1898  and  in  1904  J.  B.  Corliss  of  the  first  district  had  a  com- 
mittee of  over  one  hundred  (Detroit  Tribune,  October  n,  1898,  April 
22,  1904). 


3O  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [466 

wards  chosen  at  the  ward  primaries,  was  chiefly  concerned 
with  municipal  nominations  and  elections.  In  Detroit  and 
Grand  Rapids,  however,  it  performed  much  of  the  campaign 
work  of  the  county  and  district  committees,  acting  at  times 
according  to  a  definite  arrangement  for  the  securing  of 
effective  cooperation. 

Primaries. — In  the  nominating  process  the  party  primary 
was  the  first  and  most  vital  step.  Here  in  theory  the 
opinion  of  the  rank  and  file  of  the  party  became  articulate 
in  definite  delegations  of  authority.  No  feature  of  the 
party  organization,  however,  was  subjected  to  so  much 
deserved  attack,  reformers,  newspapers,  and  party  leaders 
repeatedly  pointing  out  the  connection  between  bad 
primaries  and  bad  government.24 

Legislation  regulating  primaries  and  conventions  was 
passed  in  1887,  1893,  1895,  1899,  and  I9OI.25  Rules  for 
the  conduct  of  primaries,  other  than  as  laid  down  in  this 
legislation,  were  made  usually  by  the  city,  ward,  and  town- 
ship committees,  and  sometimes  by  the  county  and  district 
committees;  but  the  actual  control  of  the  primary  was  in 
the  hands  of  the  ward  and  township  committees  or  of  the 
precinct  committeemen. 

Prior  to  1895,  primaries  were  generally  held  by  townships 
and  wards.  The  local  act  of  1895  made  precinct  primaries 
mandatory  in  Detroit;  and  the  public  act  of  the  same  year 
made  precinct  primaries  optional  with  the  city  committees 
in  cities  of  fifty  to  one  hundred  and  fifty  thousand.26  Early 
in  the  nineties  the  general  custom  seems  to  have  been  to 
hold  a  separate  primary  for  practically  every  convention.27 

MFor  example,  Detroit  Free  Press,  March  8,  1895,  October  8,  1890. 

15 1  do  not  consider  in  this  chapter  the  local  direct  nomination  laws 
passed  for  Kent,  Muskegon,  and  Wayne  counties  in  1901  and  1903. 
There  is  a  summary  account  and  criticism  of  primary  legislation  in 
R.  W.  Butterfield,  "Direct  Primaries  in  Kent  County,"  in  Papers  and 
Addresses  on  Primary  Reform,  read  at  the  Annual  Meeting  of  the 
Michigan  Political  Science  Association,  1905,  pp.  1-7. 

26  Local  Acts,  1895,  No.  411;  Public  Acts,  1895,  No.  135. 

27  Thus  in  Wayne  County  in  1892  the  Republicans  held  six  primaries: 
the  first,  to  elect  delegates  to  the  district  convention;  this  convention 
elected  delegates  to  the  national  convention  and  to  the  county  conven- 
tion which  elected  delegates  to  the  state  delegate  convention ;  the  second, 


467]    PARTY  COMMITTEES,  PRIMARIES,  AND  CONVENTIONS      3! 

In  the  townships  there  were  probably  fewer  primaries  in 
a  year  than  were  sometimes  held  in  the  counties;  but  in 
presidential  years  there  were  as  many  as  four.  The  ten- 
dency, however,  seems  to  have  been  to  lessen  the  number  of 
primaries  and  to  assign  more  work  to  each  one.28  There 
were  disadvantages  in  holding  six  primaries  in  a  year;  but  it 
is  hard  to  see  any  counterbalancing  advantages  in  having 
one  primary  elect  seven  sets  of  party  officials,  as  was  some- 
times done. 

The  city  or  county  committee  issued  the  official  call  for 
the  ward  primaries.29  Conflicting  calls  were  sometimes 
issued  by  different  committees,  resulting  in  the  selection  of 
contesting  delegations.  The  township  committees  called 
the  township  primaries.  The  call  stated  purpose,  date,  and 
hours  of  the  primary,  leaving  the  place,  in  cities,  to  be 
designated  later  by  the  ward  committees.  Sometimes  the 
call  included  additional  directions;  for  example,  that  voting 
should  be  by  ballot,  or  that  the  primary  should  be  held  at  a 
central  location.  The  law  of  1893  provided  that  notices  of 
primaries  should  be  published  or  posted  five  days  in 
advance.30 

Not  all  primaries  were  partisan.  In  the  villages  nomi- 
nating primaries  were  frequently  called  in  a  general  manner 
and  participated  in  by  members  of  more  than  one  party;31 

to  elect  delegates  to  the  county  convention  which  elected  delegates  to 
the  state  nominating  convention;  the  third,  to  elect  delegates  to  the 
county  convention  which  elected  delegates  to  a  special  state  convention 
held  to  nominate  a  candidate  for  judge  of  the  supreme  court;  the  fourth, 
to  elect  delegates  to  the  congressional  district  convention  to  nominate 
a  candidate  for  Congress;  the  fifth,  to  elect  delegates  to  county,  city, 
and  senatorial  district  conventions;  the  sixth,  to  nominate  candidates 
for  aldermen  and  to  elect  members  of  the  city  committee. 

28  Thus,  on  October  18,  1900,  the  Republicans  in  Detroit  held  one 
primary  for  the  choosing  of  aldermanic  candidates,  members  of  the 
ward  committees,  members  of  the  primary  and  election  boards,  delegates 
to  the  county  nominating  convention,  delegates  to  the  city  nominating 
convention,  delegates  to  the  senatorial  district  nominating  convention, 
and   delegates  to  the  congressional  district   nominating  convention 
(Detroit  Tribune,  October  18,  1900). 

29  Early  in  the  period,  however,  the  call  for  the  county  or  city  con- 
vention usually  "requested"  the  ward  committees  to  call  the  primaries 
for  a  certain  date  (ibid.,  July  28,  1888). 

30  Report  of  Attorney-General,  1899,  p.  92;  Public  Acts,  1893,  No. 
175.     This  provision  was  also  in  Local  Acts,  1901,  No.  470. 

S1  Report  of  Attorney-General,  1899. 


32  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [468 

and  I  am  told  that  in  one  township  it  was  the  custom  to 
hold  a  union  primary  for  the  nomination  of  township 
officers,  the  first  and  second  choices  of  this  primary  receiving 
places  on  the  ballot. 

Custom  decreed  that  the  call  for  the  primary  should  not 
be  issued  in  advance  of  the  call  for  the  corresponding  con- 
vention; and  snap  primaries  do  not  seem  to  have  been  a 
general  or  serious  evil,  although  they  were  occasionally 
attempted,  especially  in  the  Republican  gubernatorial 
contests  in  1896,  1900,  and  I9O2.32  In  some  instances 
primaries  were  held  without  any  call  at  all.33  Primaries 
were  sometimes  purposely  located  in  out-of-the-way  corners 
of  the  ward,  and  prior  to  1893  were  in  the  largest  cities 
frequently  held  in  saloons.34  The  act  of  that  year  pre- 
scribed that  primaries  should  not  be  held  in  saloons  or  in 
places  adjacent  to  them.35 

In  general,  primaries  met  within  three  days  of  the  local 
convention  and  very  often  on  the  day  preceding  the  con- 
vention. The  legislation  of  1895  prescribed  that  all  wards 
or  precincts  in  cities  of  over  fifteen  thousand  inhabitants 
should  hold  primaries  on  the  same  day,  but  that  all 
parties  should  hold  primaries  on  different  days.  The  com- 
mon councils  in  cities  of  fifteen  thousand  to  one  hundred  and 
fifty  thousand  inhabitants  were  empowered  to  require 
parties  to  hold  primaries  within  a  given  time;  but,  unless 
the  council  chose  to  act,  the  time  of  the  primaries  should 
be  determined  by  the  city  committee.36  In  Detroit  all 
primaries  should  be  held  after  the  last  session  of  the  board 
of  registration,  and  for  the  October  and  March  primaries 
definite  days  were  assigned  to  each  party. 

Prior  to  1893  the  usual  hours  for  primaries  as  fixed  by  the 
county,  city,  or  district  committee  were  in  the  cities  from 
6  or  7  to  8  p.  m. ;  in  the  townships  hours  in  the  early  af ter- 

32  Detroit  Tribune,  April  13,  1896,  May  30,  September  9,  1900,  June 
4,  1902;  Detroit  Free  Press,  March  22,  1896. 

33  Detroit  Free  Press,  June  21,  1894. 

84  Ibid.,  September  7,  1886,  July  7,  8,  1892;  Detroit  Tribune,  July 
9,  1892. 

'  Public  Acts,  1893,  No.  175. 
36  Local  Acts,  1901,  No.  470. 


469]    PARTY  COMMITTEES,  PRIMARIES,  AND  CONVENTIONS      33 

noon  were  selected.  The  committee  in  charge,  however, 
often  closed  the  polls  long  before  the  announced  time  for 
closing,  and  not  infrequently  while  many  were  still  waiting 
to  vote.37  Sometimes  the  committeemen  opened  and  closed 
the  polls  intermittently  in  order  to  receive  the  votes  of 
henchmen  and  exclude  the  votes  of  opponents  and  strangers. 
Manipulation  of  the  clock  was  in  the  opinion  of  some 
observers  the  chief  evil  of  the  party  primary.  As  a 
remedy  the  law  of  1893  provided  that  in  cities  of  twenty-five 
thousand  or  more  the  primaries  should  begin  at  2  and  last 
until  8  p.  m.;38  and  the  acts  of  1895  prescribed  these  hours 
for  all  cities  of  fifteen  thousand  or  more,39  except  that  in 
Detroit  the  hours  were  to  be  from  3.30  to  7.30  p.  m.  The 
amending  act  of  1899  provided  that  the  hours  in  cities  of 
less  than  thirty  thousand  should  be  from  4  to  8;  in  cities 
of  more  than  thirty  thousand,  2  to  8.40  In  practice,  however, 
the  ward  committeeman  continued  in  many  cases  to  act 
as  a  thoroughly  biased  time-keeper.41 

The  act  of  1887  prescribed  no  method  for  the  organization 
of  the  primary.  The  township  primaries  usually  assembled 
in  the  town  hall  and  were  called  to  order  by  the  chairman 
of  the  township  committee;  in  the  small  cities  the  ward 
primary  was  similarly  a  party  assembly  or  mass  convention 
of  which  the  chairman  of  the  ward  committee  was  tem- 
porary presiding  officer.  The  primary  organized  by  electing 
a  chairman,  a  secretary,  and  tellers,  but  in  practice  the 
organization  of  the  primary  was  largely  determined  by  the 
chairman  of  the  ward  or  township  committee.  Some  of  the 
worst  cases  of  disorder  occurred  over  the  organization  of 
the  primary  board,  for  the  voters  generally  recognized  that 

"Detroit  Tribune,  October  26,  1886,  October  2,  1888,  October  II, 
1890,  July  7,  1892,  February  13,  1893;  Detroit  Free  Press,  August  6, 
1886,  April  26,  1888,  October  i,  1890,  March  II,  14,  1891. 

38  Public  Acts,  1893,  No.  175. 

39  Public  Acts,  1895,  No.  135;  Local  Acts,  1895,  No.  411. 

40  Public  Acts,  1899,  No.  198. 

41  Detroit  Tribune,  June  8,  October  II,  1898,  February  21,  27,  1899, 
October  18,  1900,  July  26,  October  18,  1902,  May  15,  28,  1904.     The 
Kent  County  act  of  1901  provided  that  hours  in  the  townships  should 
be  from  2  to  6  p.  m.  and  in  the  city  from  2  to  8  (Local  Acts,  1901,  No.  470). 


34  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [470 

this  initial  step  in  the  proceedings  was  very  likely  to  deter- 
mine the  result.  In  quiet  times  there  were  often  hardly 
enough  persons  present  to  elect  officers;  on  the  other  hand, 
during  an  exciting  contest  so  large  and  so  unruly  a  crowd 
sometimes  assembled  that  fair  organization  was  impossible.42 

In  Detroit  the  primaries  were  managed  by  a  caucus  board, 
which  usually  consisted  of  the  chairman  or  a  member  of 
the  ward  committee  and  two  inspectors  chosen  by  the  voters 
present  at  the  opening  of  the  primary.  The  legislature  in 
1895  attempted  to  curb  the  power  of  the  ward  chairman  in 
Detroit  by  providing  not  only  for  precinct  primaries,  but 
for  the  election  by  ballot  at  the  primary  of  three  primary 
election  inspectors  and  three  alternate  inspectors  who 
should  hold  office  for  one  year,  and  who,  with  the  ward 
committeeman  resident  in  the  precinct  as  ex-officio  chair- 
man, should  constitute  a  board  of  primary  election  in- 
spectors for  all  primaries  during  the  year.43  Outside  of 
Detroit  the  board  of  inspectors  should  be  composed  of  a 
member  of  the  ward  committee  as  ex-officio  chairman,  and 
two  inspectors  who  should  serve  for  two  years.44  The  act 
of  1887  had  provided  that  the  presiding  officer  and  the  in- 
spectors should  take  an  oath  as  in  general  elections.45  The 
most  progressive  party  leaders  favored  putting  the  pri- 
maries in  the  control  of  the  regular  registration  officers ;  but 
this  plan  was  never  adopted  by  the  legislature.46  Finally 
in  1901  the  legislature  enacted  that  in  the  townships  of 
Kent  County  the  township  committee  should  act  as  board 
of  primary  inspectors,  and  that  in  the  city  a  member  of  the 
ward  committee  as  ex-officio  chairman  and  two  inspectors 
should  preside  over  the  ward  primary.47 

One  of  the  most  persistent  evils  was  the  participation  by 
members  of  one  party  in  the  primaries  of  the  other.  In 
Detroit  when  there  were  contests  in  the  Republican  party 
Democrats  usually  took  part  in  Republican  primaries. 

42  Detroit  Tribune,  February  20,  1895. 

43  Local  Acts,  1895,  No.  411. 

44  Public  Acts,  1895,  No.  135. 
«  Public  Acts,  1887,  No.  303. 

46  Butterfield,  page  iff. 

47  Local  Acts,  1901,  No.  470. 


47 J]   PARTY  COMMITTEES,  PRIMARIES,  AND  CONVENTIONS      35 

The  act  of  1887  left  the  parties  free  to  prescribe  their  own 
tests  of  party  membership,  the  final  decision  as  to  a  voter's 
eligibility  resting  with  the  board,  and  in  contested  primaries 
challenges  were  frequent.  The  poll-list,  the  registry  roll, 
and  even  the  city  directory  were  occasionally  used  to  check 
illegal  voting,  but  with  little  success.48  The  voter  was  not 
required  to  declare  his  party  affiliation  unless  challenged. 
The  public  act  of  1895  provided  for  party  registration  in 
cities  of  fifteen  to  one  hundred  and  fifty  thousand;  the 
registration  had  to  be  in  charge,  however,  of  the  city  com- 
mittee. It  provided  also  for  challenges  and  for  the  taking 
of  an  oath  as  to  party  affiliation  by  the  challenged  voter, 
and  it  required  a  sworn  witness  as  to  residence.  No  one, 
according  to  the  law,  could  vote  whose  name  was  not  on 
the  party  registration  list  or  the  registration  list  of  the  last 
election  unless  he  took  an  oath  as  to  residence,  age,  and 
party  affiliation.49  The  parties  did  not  generally  undertake 
or  did  not  continue  the  registration  of  their  members,  and 
in  a  few  years  this  part  of  the  law  was  ignored.50  Through- 
out the  period  the  challenge  and  the  oath  were  practically 
the  only  checks  on  the  members  of  one  party  voting  in  the 
primaries  of  the  other.51 

The  local  act  of  1895  applying  to  Detroit  went  somewhat 
more  into  detail,  making  it  the  duty  of  the  city  clerk  to  deliver 
the  registration  list  and  the  blanks  for  poll-lists  to  a  police- 
man who  should  attend  the  primary  and  deliver  the  ma- 
terials to  the  chairman  of  the  board  of  inspectors.  The  law 
required  the  board  of  inspectors  to  check  off  voters  on  the 
registration  list  and  to  keep  a  poll-list  of  all  persons  voting. 
But  this  part  of  the  act  was  seldom  faithfully  observed. 
The  residence  qualification  was  often  disregarded,  gangs  of 
heelers  sometimes  marching  from  precinct  to  precinct  and 
voting  in  each. 

The  act  of  1887  did  not  prescribe  a  method  of  voting,  but 

"Detroit  Tribune,  October  17,  1890,  October  26,  1892,  September 
21,  1894;  Detroit  Free  Press,  September  21,  1894. 

49  Public  Acts,  1895,  No.  135. 

50  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  August  24,  1898. 

51  Report  of  Attorney-General,  1899. 


36  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [472 

implied  that  voting  by  ballot  was  the  regular  way.  The 
township  primaries  and  the  ward  primaries  in  the  less 
populous  cities  usually  elected  delegates  and  nominated 
candidates  by  acclamation.  When  contests  developed, 
however,  informal  and  formal  ballots  were  taken.  In 
Detroit  the  call  often  specifically  prescribed  voting  by 
ballot,  and  the  act  of  1893  made  this  method  of  voting 
mandatory  in  cities  of  twenty-five  thousand  or  more,  pre- 
scribing that  ballots  might  be  received  through  an  open 
window, but  where  the  ballot-box  was  inside,  the  room  should 
be  large  enough  to  admit  a  reasonable  number  of  persons.57 
The  local  act  of  1895  provided  that  in  Detroit  booths  should 
be  set  up  by  the  city  council  and  that  the  polling  place  and 
all  the  arrangements  for  secret  voting  should  be  the  same 
as  in  general  elections.  The  general  act  of  the  same  year, 
which  was  less  skilfully  drawn,  contained  the  same  provision 
but  lacked  the  machinery  to  carry  it  out.  It  was  dis- 
cretionary with  the  common  councils  to  cause  booths  to  be 
erected,  and  if  erected  there  was  nothing  in  the  act  to 
compel  their  use.53  Both  acts  provided  for  ballots  of  uni- 
form size,  but  the  ballots  were  prepared  and  distributed 
outside  the  polling  place,  and  repeating  and  stuffing  were 
frequent. 

The  primary  board  counted  the  ballots,  precisely  what 
it  should  not  have  done.  An  innocuous  provision  of  the  act 
of  1887  had  made  false  counting  a  misdemeanor.  The 
local  act  of  1895  provided  for  certified  duplicate  copies  of 
the  count,  one  copy  to  be  delivered  to  the  city  clerk  and  the 
other  to  constitute  the  credentials  of  delegates  elected  at 
the  primary.  But  the  counting  was  often  conducted 
secretly  and  fraudulently,  and  the  board  of  inspectors 
through  its  power  to  count  the  ballots  was  able  to  perpetuate 
itself  in  office.  In  the  townships  and  smaller  cities  the 
counting  of  the  ballots,  like  other  features  of  the  primary, 
was  less  open  to  criticism.54 

In  the  opinion  of  most  observers  the  fundamental  evil 

K  Public  Acts,  1893,  No.  175. 

M  Report  of  Attorney-General,  1896,  p.  97. 

"  Correspondence. 


473J    PARTY  COMMITTEES,  PRIMARIES,  AND  CONVENTIONS     37 

in  the  nominating  system  was  not  any  defect  in  machinery 
or  absence  of  legislative  control,  but  it  was  the  conspicuous 
failure  on  the  part  of  the  average  citizen  to  attend  the 
primaries.  It  seems  to  have  been  generally  felt  that  the 
primaries  were  cut-and-dried  affairs,  managed  by  the  ward 
committeemen,  and  that  whatever  might  be  done  or  who- 
ever might  vote,  the  result  would  be  the  same.  At  the 
usual  hours  of  primaries  the  workingmen  found  it  hard  to 
attend.  There  were  too  many  primaries  in  a  year.  Finally 
the  primary  was  merely  a  preliminary  step  in  a  complicated 
nominating  process,  and  it  was  an  impossibility  to  register 
at  the  primary  an  intelligent  decision  or  a  clear  mandate 
as  to  nominations  or  issues.55  Ordinarily  when  the  good 
citizen  went  to  the  polls  in  Detroit  he  either  found  them 
closed  or  found  only  one  list  of  delegates  to  vote  for ;  and  in 
either  event  it  is  scarcely  surprising  that  he  should  consider 
his  visit  useless. 

No  official  record  of  the  primary  vote  was  preserved,  and 
the  newspapers  seldom  published  the  vote  unless  the 
primaries  were  in  some  respect  exceptional  or  sensational. 
It  is,  therefore,  impossible  to  make  satisfactory  computa- 
tions of  primary  votes.  From  the  data  available,  however, 
it  is  evident  that  the  proportion  of  the  party  membership 
attending  the  primaries  was  on  the  average  very  small. 
More  than  fifty  per  cent  of  the  party  rarely  attended,  and 
the  average  was  probably  not  more  than  twenty  per  cent. 
The  city  primaries  were  better  attended  than  the  country, 
the  Republican  better  than  the  Democratic,  the  contested 
better  than  the  uncontested,  and  those  held  in  regular 
election  years  better  than  those  held  in  off  years.56 

It  is  true  that  occasionally  the  primary  vote  exceeded  the 

66  An  intelligent  Republican  politician  of  Detroit  in  1902  attributed 
the  lack  of  attendance  at  primaries  to  (i)  the  large  number  of  primaries; 
(2)  the  power  of  the  ward-heeler;  (3)  the  fact  that  the  delegate  while 
expressing  the  voter's  choice  for  one  candidate  did  not  express  it  for 
others;  (4)  the  bartering  of  votes  in  conventions;  and  (5)  the  manipula- 
tion of  conventions  (C.  C.  Simons,  "Direct  Primary  Elections,"  in 
Publications  of  the  Michigan  Political  Science  Association,  p.  136). 

68  The  following  figures  represent  what  were  believed  to  be  abnor- 
mally large  votes  in  Republican  primaries  and  will  serve  to  illustrate, 
although  not  to  prove,  the  above  estimate: 


38  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN  [474 

party  vote  at  the  succeeding  election.  At  Ann  Arbor,  for 
example,  in  1900,  on  the  occasion  of  a  contest  for  the  control 
of  the  Republican  county  organization,  1369  voted  in  the 
primaries  and  1341  voted  for  the  Republican  candidate  for 
secretary  of  state.57  Such  an  abnormally  large  vote  may 
be  attributed  to  the  participation  of  Democrats  or  to  apathy 
or  defection  in  the  election.  To  offset  the  occasional  heavy 
votes,  there  was  in  many  cases  practically  no  attendance 
at  all,  and  frequently  no  primary  was  held.  Examples  of 
this  extreme  are  to  be  drawn  chiefly  from  Democratic 
history.58 


Date 

Place 

Primary 

Election 

vote 

vote 

1892' 

Detroit,  14  wards 

8354 

18980 

i9OOb 

Detroit 

13602 

29229 

1900" 

Lansing 

1219 

2073 

i900d 

Battle  Creek 

I5H 

2375 

1898' 

Brownston  Tp.,  Wayne  Co. 

246 

375 

1903' 

Grand  Rapids 

1765 

7393 

1902* 

Grand  Rapids 

4652 

6805 

•  Detroit  Tribune,  July  9,  1892;  Michigan  Manual,  1901. 
b  Michigan  Manual;  Detroit  Tribune,  June  I,  1900. 

c  Detroit  Tribune,  June  13,  1900. 

d  This  was  called  the  largest  vote  known  (Detroit  Tribune,  June  12, 
1900). 

e  This  was  said  to  be  the  largest  primary  in  the  history  of  the  town- 
ship. 

*  These    primaries,  according  to  newspaper  reports,  called  out  an 
unusually  heavy  vote   (Grand   Rapids  Herald,  February   18,   1903). 
The  heaviest  vote  was  in  the  fourth  ward  which  gave  300  in  the  primary 
and  701  in  the  election. 

B  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  June  19,  1902. 
67  Detroit  Tribune,  April  24,  1900. 

58  The  following  table  gives  the  attendance  in  five  Democratic  pri- 
maries in  Detroit: 

Date  Place  Attendance 

1897*  Detroit  No  primaries  in  23  precincts 

1 899*  Detroit  No  primaries  in  40  precincts 

1901°  Detroit  No  primaries  in  55  precincts,  and  in 

three  wards  no  one  attended  but  the  police- 
men with  the  materials 

1902*  Detroit  In  120  precincts,  334 

1903'  Detroit  No  primaries  in  49  of  the  125  precincts 

•Detroit  Tribune,  March  19,  1897. 
b  Detroit  Free  Press,  March  5,  1899. 
c  Detroit  Tribune,  March  2,  1901.' 
d  Ibid.,  July  26,  1902. 
e  Simons,  p.  140. 


475]    PARTY  COMMITTEES,  PRIMARIES,  AND  CONVENTIONS      39 

The  party  primaries  were  at  their  worst  in  Detroit,  where 
in  close  contests  disorder  was  usual  and  fights  were  not 
infrequent.89  The  township  primaries  were  often  controlled 
by  rings  of  leading  men  or  petty  politicians,  but  seldom 
through  corrupt  or  "strong-arm"  methods.  Bribery  was 
known  to  be  common  in  Detroit,  less  common  in  other 
cities,  and  comparatively  rare  in  the  rural  districts.  Votes 
in  primaries  were  purchased  in  a  variety  of  ways,  but  usually 
with  drinks60  or  small  sums  of  money.61  Primary  corruption 
attained  its  highest  point  in  1894,  and  led  to  the  public  act 
of  1895  which  provided  penalties  for  soliciting  money  from 
the  candidates  or  from  any  other  person,  for  receiving 
directly  or  indirectly  any  money,  promise  of  place  or  posi- 
tion, or  consideration  of  any  kind  for  a  vote  or  for  support 
or  for  attendance,  for  voting  at  more  than  one  primary, 
for  hiring  carriages  or  other  vehicles  for  conveying  voters 
other  than  those  physically  disabled,  and  for  treating  or 
otherwise  entertaining  any  voter.  These  provisions  were 
not  effective,  however,  and  primary  corruption  reached  a 
climax  in  the  Republican  "barrel"  canvasses  of  1900  and 
1902.  The  exact  amount  spent  by  the  candidates  legiti- 
mately or  illegitimately  cannot  be  ascertained;  and  current 
estimates  were  doubtless  exaggerated.  In  each  of  the 
three  counties  of  Kalamazoo,  Ionia,  and  Washtenaw 
residents  state  that  each  of  the  three  candidates  in  1900 
spent  ten  thousand  dollars.  It  was  commonly  reported 
that  the  successful  candidate  in  that  year  spent  to  secure 
the  nomination  one  hundred  thousand  dollars,  much  of 
which  was  used  in  the  primaries.62 

In  addition  to  the  various  primaries,  a  Detroit  partisan 

M  Detroit  Free  Press,  October  30,  1894;  Detroit  Tribune,  November 
27,  1894. 

60  A  party  official  said  in  1894:  "I  heard  one  man  say  that  he  had 
got  eighteen  beers  for  voting  eighteen  times  at  one  caucus"  (Detroit 
Tribune,  February  27,  1894). 

81  In  the  Republican  primaries,  July  7,  1892,  it  was  reported  that 
toughs  were  paid  one  dollar  a  head  (Detroit  Free  Press,  July  7,  1892). 
See  also  Detroit  Tribune,  June  2,  1900. 

61 A  manager  of  one  of  the  unsuccessful  candidates  in  the  same  cam- 
paign told  me  that  his  candidate  spent  $57,000  in  Kent  County  alone 
and  lost  the  county. 


4O  PARTY   ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN  [476 

in  1892  should  have  been  interested  in  the  following  con- 
ventions, beginning  in  April  and  ending  in  October:  a 
county  convention  to  elect  delegates  to  the  state  delegate 
convention;  a  congressional  district  convention  to  elect 
delegates  to  the  national  convention;  a  state  convention  to 
elect  delegates  to  the  national  convention;  a  county  con- 
vention to  elect  delegates  to  the  state  nominating  con- 
vention; a  state  convention  to  nominate  state  officers;  a 
county  convention  to  elect  delegates  to  a  special  state 
convention;  a  special  state  convention  to  nominate  a 
justice  of  the  supreme  court;  a  city  convention  to  nominate 
city  officers;  a  senatorial  district  convention  to  nominate 
state  senators;  a  county  convention  to  nominate  county 
officers;  and  a  congressional  district  convention  to  nominate 
a  candidate  for  Congress.  In  Lansing  in  1896  there  were 
six  conventions:  a  city  convention,  three  county  conven- 
tions, a  senatorial  convention,  and  a  representative  con- 
vention. 

Outside  of  Wayne  County  it  seems  to  have  been  usual  for 
one  county  convention  to  select  delegates  to  the  state  con- 
vention, the  congressional  district  convention,  and  the 
senatorial  district  convention.  The  county  nominating 
convention  was  customarily  held  at  the  same  time  as  the 
representative  district  convention,  the  former  body  dividing 
according  to  districts  to  make  nominations  for  the  legis- 
lature. 

The  call  for  the  county  convention,  issued  by  the  chair- 
man and  the  secretary  of  the  county  committee  and  usually 
published  in  the  newspapers  two  or  three  weeks  in  advance 
of  the  convention,  stated  place,  date,  hour,  and  purpose  of 
the  gathering,  apportionment  of  delegates,  and  date  and 
hours  of  the  primaries  for  the  selection  of  delegates.63  It 
seems  to  have  been  recognized  as  a  customary  rule  that  the 
county  convention  should  not  be  called  before  the  state 
convention  had  been  called,  and  that  the  county  convention 

M  Detroit  Tribune,  March  15,  April  22,  1888,  June  8,  1898;  Detroit 
Journal,  February  21,  1899;  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  August  2,  1898, 
February  13,  1899,  April  4,  1900,  June  12,  1902,  February  17,  1903. 


477]    PARTY  COMMITTEES,  PRIMARIES,  AND  CONVENTIONS     4! 

should  transact  only  the  business  stated  in  the  call.64  The 
dates  of  county  conventions  varied  greatly. 

In  the  number  and  the  apportionment  of  delegates,  which 
were  subject  to  no  uniform  rule,  a  conflict  asserted  itself 
between  the  principle  of  equality  in  representation  of  wards 
and  townships  and  the  principle  of  apportionment  according 
to  party  vote.  Where  the  former  principle  prevailed  the 
representation  appears  to  have  been  usually  one  delegate 
from  each  voting  precinct,  or  three,  four,  or  five  from  each 
township  or  ward.  In  many  cases,  however,  the  number 
of  delegates  was  roughly  proportional  either  to  the  whole 
population  or  to  the  party  vote. 

According  to  a  rule  adopted  by  the  Republican  state 
convention  in  1876,  every  county  was  entitled  to  one  dele- 
gate for  each  five  hundred  of  the  total  vote  cast  for  governor 
at  the  last  election  and  one  additional  delegate  for  every 
fraction  of  three  hundred  votes,  but  each  organized  county 
was  entitled  to  at  least  one  delegate.  In  1900  the  Repub- 
lican state  convention  changed  the  apportionment  so  that 
in  the  future  it  would  be  based  on  the  vote  for  governor  in 
presidential  years;  and  later  the  Republicans  provided  that 
each  organized  county  should  have  two  delegates. 

Nominations  in  county  conventions  prior  to  1895  were 
often  made  by  ballot,  but  when  there  was  no  contest  they 
were  usually  by  acclamation.  The  local  act  of  1895 
provided  that  candidates  should  be  selected  by  a  viva  voce 
vote  on  a  roll-call  of  the  delegates;65  and  an  act  of  1901  apply- 
ing to  Kent  County  prescribed  detailed  directions  for  voting 
in  conventions,  providing  for  a  roll-call  of  ward  and  town- 
ship delegations  by  the  secretary  of  the  convention,  for  an 
announcement  of  the  votes  by  the  chairmen  of  delegations, 
and  for  a  poll  of  the  delegation  in  case  of  challenge,  and 
prohibiting  the  announcement  of  votes  of  absent  delegates.86 

The  distribution  of  nominations  so  as  to  satisfy  the  various 
parts  of  the  county  was  a  problem  which  party  managers 

64  Detroit  Tribune,  September  9,  1900,  May  4,  1904;  Ann  Arbor 
Democrat,  April  24,  1896;  Lansing  State  Republican,  April  30,  1896. 

65  Detroit  Tribune,  June  26,  1902. 
68  Local  Acts,  1901,  No.  389. 


42  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [478 

had  to  solve.  In  some  counties  there  was  an  understanding 
that  certain  offices  should  go  to  the  city  or  cities  and  others 
to  the  country.67  County  conventions  in  the  upper  penin- 
sula, moreover,  as  well  as  in  other  sections  where  there  were 
marked  racial  groups,  had  to  make  their  nominations  reflect 
more  or  less  faithfully  the  racial  complexion  of  the  county. 
Even  in  counties  which  were  not  dominated  by  a  machine, 
nominations  apparently  were  usually  pretty  well  settled 
before  the  meeting  of  the  convention,  in  order  to  secure  a 
satisfactory  distribution  of  nominations  and  a  harmonious 
convention. 

The  call  for  the  state  convention,  determined  upon  by  the 
state  central  committee  a  month  or  more  before  the  date 
of  the  convention  and  issued  and  signed  by  the  chairman  and 
the  secretary,  prescribed  date,  place,  hours,  and  purpose 
of  the  gathering,  apportionment  of  delegates  among  the 
counties,  residence  qualifications  of  delegates,  date,  hours, 
and  work  of  the  congressional  district  caucuses,  directions 
to  the  secretaries  of  county  committees  to  forward  certified 
lists  of  delegates,  and  often  other  directions  to  county  com- 
mittees and  their  officers.68  The  state  delegate  convention 
usually  met  in  May,  the  state  nominating  convention  in 
July,  August,  or  early  September.  The  fixing  of  the  date 
was  often  a  tactical  move  for  the  advantage  of  some 
candidate.69 

In  1890  the  Republican  state  convention  had  944  and  the 
Democratic  954  delegates;  in  1902  the  Republican  had 
1094  and  the  Democratic  1102.  Absent  delegates — and  a 
number  were  always  absent — were  represented  by  proxy  or 
their  places  were  filled  by  the  remainder  of  the  delegation. 

67  Detroit  Tribune,  June  19,  1898,  and  interviews. 

88  For  an  example,  see  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  July  30,  1898.  In 
the  Democratic  state  central  committee  meeting  in  1900  the  following 
considerations  were  mentioned  in  fixing  the  date  of  the  state  nominating 
convention:  (i)  It  should  be  soon  after  the  national  convention  so  as 
to  take  advantage  of  the  enthusiasm  that  has  been  aroused;  (2)  it  should 
be  after  harvest  so  that  farmers  can  attend;  (3)  it  should  be  late  so  that 
the  campaign  can  be  short,  sharp,  and  economical;  (4)  it  should  be  early 
enough  to  give  time  for  thorough  organization. 

69  Detroit  Tribune,  February  25,  1891,  April  30,  1896,  May  4,  1900; 
Detroit  Free  Press,  May  5,  1892. 


479]    PARTY  COMMITTEES,  PRIMARIES,  AND  CONVENTIONS     43 

The  northern  counties  were  most  likely  to  be  unrepresented. 
The  attendance  was  better  in  Republican  than  in  Demo- 
cratic conventions.70  It  was  a  rule  that  delegates  in  state 
conventions  should  reside  in  the  counties  which  they  rep- 
resented.71 Delegates  were  ordinarily  admitted  to  the 
convention  hall  by  badge  or  ticket  supplied  by  the  secretary 
of  the  state  central  committee ;  they  were  grouped  according 
to  congressional  districts;  and  with  the  exception  of  dis- 
tinguished guests  no  one  not  a  delegate  was  ordinarily 
allowed  on  the  floor.72 

Previous  to  the  convention  the  various  congressional 
district  delegations  held  caucuses,  at  which,  following  the 
selection  of  a  chairman,  a  secretary,  and  a  teller,  each 
district  chose  two  members  of  the  central  committee,  one 
vice-president  of  the  convention,  one  member  of  the  com- 
mittee on  credentials,  one  member  of  the  committee  on 
permanent  organization  and  order  of  business,  and  one 
member  of  the  committee  on  resolutions.  The  congressional 
district  appeared  again  as  an  organization  unit  in  the  selec- 
tion of  district  delegates  to  the  national  convention.  These 
were  usually  chosen  by  conventions  in  the  districts,  but  were 
sometimes  selected  by  district  caucuses  at  the  state  con- 
vention. 

With  respect  to  the  nomination  of  presidential  electors 
the  practice  of  the  two  parties  seems  to  have  differed.  In 
Republican  conventions  the  congressional  district  was 
regarded  as  the  unit,  and  presidential  electors  were  looked 
upon  as  national  officials,  and  were  accordingly  put  in 
nomination  by  the  state  convention  which  selected  delegates 
to  the  national  convention.  In  Democratic  conventions 
the  county  was  regarded  as  the  unit,  and  presidential 
electors  were  looked  upon  as  state  officers,  and  were  usually 
nominated  by  the  state  convention  which  nominated  state 
officers.73  The  difference  in  practice  corresponds  to  the 

70  In  the  latter  part  of  the  period  no  more  than  two  or  three  hundred 
delegates  attended   some   of   the    Democratic    conventions    (Detroit 
Tribune,  June  22,  1898,  March  7,  1901). 

71  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  February  13,  1899. 

72  Detroit  Tribune,  April  30,  1896. 

71  Detroit  Free  Press,  May  22,  1908. 


44  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [480 

different  constitutional  philosophies  of  the  two  parties. 
Usually  nomination  speeches  were  made  on  a  roll-call  of 
districts  and  an  informal  vote  was  taken  by  counties  or 
districts,  the  chairman  of  the  delegation  announcing  the 
vote.  Convention  interest  centered  in  the  nomination 
for  governor.  In  the  Republican  party  there  were  keen 
contests  for  this  honor,  since  nomination  was  practically 
equivalent  to  election.  In  nominations  for  other  state 
offices  there  was,  in  Republican  conventions  at  least,  con- 
siderable log-rolling  and  little  interest  in  the  actual  balloting. 
After  nominating  the  head  of  the  ticket,  delegates  left  the 
hall,  and  the  proceedings  came  to  an  end  somewhat  per- 
functorily in  the  midst  of  disorder. 

The  district  conventions  were  called  by  the  district  com- 
mittee, usually  subsequent  to  the  state  convention.  Gen- 
erally speaking,  where  the  district  coincided  with  or  was 
smaller  than  the  county,  representation  in  the  district 
convention  was  the  same  as  in  the  county  convention  and 
delegates  were  elected  in  ward  and  township  primaries. 
Where  the  district  comprised  two  or  more  counties,  repre- 
sentation was  likely  to  be  the  same  as  in  the  state  convention 
and  delegates  were  elected  by  county  conventions.  In  at 
least  one  respect,  however,  Republican  district  conventions 
differed  from  both  state  and  county  conventions.  Where 
the  district  was  composed  of  two  or  more  counties,  as  was 
frequently  the  case,  each  county  was  likely  to  have  a  candi- 
date for  the  nomination, — a  situation  which  resulted  in 
dead-locks  and  prolonged  ballotings.74  The  desire  for 
harmony  often  led  to  an  understanding  that  nominations 
should  alternate  from  one  county  to  another,  and  in  the 
case  of  members  of  the  legislature  the  two-term  custom 
facilitated  these  understandings. 

Leaders  in  secret  conference  usually  prepared  for  the 

74  Detroit  Tribune,  September  15,  1894.  In  1898  the  seventh 
congressional  district  Republican  convention  nominated  Weeks  on  the 
749th  ballot  (Grand  Rapids  Herald,  September  4,  1898).  In  1902  the 
second  congressional  district  Republican  convention  nominated  Town- 
send  on  the  Soist  ballot  (Detroit  Tribune,  May  29,  1902).  See  also 
Detroit  Tribune,  August  18,  1892,  August  4,  1896,  June  24,  July  22, 
1898. 


481]    PARTY  COMMITTEES,  PRIMARIES,  AND  CONVENTIONS     45 

real  work  of  the  convention  long  before  the  assembling  of 
the  delegates,  not  infrequently  planning  every  step  in  the 
convention  program,  naming  committees,  slating  nomi- 
nations, and  appointing  a  steering  committee  or  a  floor 
leader  to  push  the  slate  through.  A  necessary  step  in  the 
control  of  a  convention  was  the  domination  of  the  ward 
and  township  committees  and  the  primaries.  More  im- 
mediately effective  was  the  control  of  the  committee  which 
called  the  convention,  for,  lacking  a  majority  of  the  dele- 
gates, a  victory  might  still  be  won  by  controlling  the  con- 
vention organization.75 

The  preliminary  organization  of  conventions  in  Michigan 
brings  to  light  a  conflict  between  what  may  be  termed  the 
idea  of  popular  control  and  the  idea  of  regularity.  This 
conflict — most  marked,  perhaps,  in  local  conventions — was 
waged  over  two  steps  in  the  preliminary  organization: 
(i)  the  appointment  of  the  temporary  chairman,  and  (2) 
the  fixing  of  the  roll  of  delegates  and  the  adjudicating  of 
credentials.  Both  of  these  steps  were  extremely  important 
in  the  strategy  of  convention  control. 

(i)  All  conventions  were  called  to  order  by  the  chairman 
of  the  appropriate  party  committee.  In  state  conventions 
between  1890  and  1904  the  temporary  chairman  seems  to 
have  been  named  in  all  cases  by  the  state  central  committee ; 
and  the  assembled  delegates  never  rejected  the  choice  of 
the  committee,  although  it  was  recognized  that  they  had 
the  power  to  do  so.76  In  county,  city,  and  district  con- 
ventions the  situation  was  different,  some  of  the  worst 
cases  of  disorder  occurring  in  connection  with  the  selection 
of  a  temporary  chairman.77  In  many  counties  and  districts 
it  was  customary  for  the  delegates  themselves  to  elect  the 
temporary  chairman,78  although,  of  course,  the  chairman 

7S  Detroit  Tribune,  April  29,  30,  1896,  October  25,  1898. 
78  But  see  Detroit  Free  Press,  August  28,  1890. 

77  Detroit  Tribune,  April  14,  August  13,  October  9,  1892,  April  29, 
June  26,  1900;  Detroit  Free  Press,  October  9,  1890,  February  26,  1893, 
June  13,  1894. 

78  Detroit  Free  Press,  March  15,  1899;  State  Republican,  June  23, 
1894,  March  31,  April  25,  30,  August  3,  September  10,  1896;  Beck  v. 
Board,  103  Mich.  192. 


46  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [482 

of  the  committee  through  his  power  of  recognition  might 
actually  determine  the  selection.  Other  temporary  officers 
were  usually  named  by  the  delegates,  who,  however,  often 
simply  confirmed  the  selections  of  the  party  committee. 
The  temporary  officers  did  not  need  to  be  delegates  to  the 
convention. 

This  difference  in  the  attitude  of  delegates  toward  the 
selection  of  the  temporary  chairman  is  explained  largely  by 
the  fact  that  in  local  conventions  the  temporary  chairman 
named  the  committees  of  the  convention.79  In  all  con- 
ventions there  were  three  important  committees:  a  com- 
mittee on  credentials,  a  committee  on  permanent  organ- 
ization and  order  of  business,  and  a  committee  on  reso- 
lutions.80 In  county  conventions  these  committees  con- 
sisted of  three  or  five  members  each.  In  state  conventions 
they  consisted  of  one  member  from  each  congressional 
district.  Most  important  was  the  committee  on  credentials ; 
and  a  consideration  of  the  work  of  this  committee  brings 
us  to  the  second  step  in  the  preliminary  organization  of  the 
convention  and  to  the  second  phase  of  the  conflict  between 
the  principles  of  popular  control  and  regularity. 

(2)  With  respect  to  the  credentials  of  delegates  to  state 
conventions  the  procedure  was  about  as  follows:  The  cre- 
dentials were  drawn  up  and  signed  by  the  chairman  and 
the  secretary  of  the  county  convention  and  issued  in  trip- 
licate, one  copy  being  sent  some  time  in  advance  of  the 
state  convention  to  the  secretary  of  the  state  central  com- 
mittee, and  one  copy  being  given  to  the  chairman  of  the 
delegation.81  The  state  central  committee  examined  the 
credentials,  made  out  the  temporary  roll  of  the  convention, 
and  authorized  the  secretary  to  issue  badges  or  tickets  to 
the  delegates  on  this  roll.  "Badges  or  tickets  were  issued 
to  the  congressional  district  members  of  the  state  committee 

79  For  a  protest  against  this  practice,  see  Detroit  Tribune,  April  14, 
1892. 

80  In  county  delegate  conventions  there  was  often  also  a  committee 
on  apportionment  and  sometimes  committees  appointed  for  special 
purposes. 

81  In  the  case  of  delegates  to  a  Democratic  state  convention  the 
credentials  were  certified  by  the  chairman  of  the  county  committee. 


483]    PARTY  COMMITTEES,  PRIMARIES,  AND  CONVENTIONS     47 

and  by  them  distributed  to  the  chairman  of  the  county 
delegations,  who  in  turn  distributed  them  to  the  individual 
delegates.  If  the  state  committee  had  not  decided  a 
contest  from  any  county,  tickets  for  that  county  were  with- 
held. If  both  contesting  delegations  were  seated — each 
being  given  one-half  a  vote — then  tickets  were  issued  to  each 
delegate  so  seated.  Badges  or  tickets  conferred  no  power. 
They  simply  enabled  delegates  to  get  into  the  hall."82  If 
there  were  no  contests,  the  state  committee  reported  in 
favor  of  the  delegates  bearing  regular  credentials,  and  the 
credentials  were  returned  to  the  convention  with  the  report. 
The  adoption  of  this  report  settled  the  permanent  roll  of  the 
convention.  In  case  of  contests  the  state  committee  often 
seated  one  of  the  contesting  delegations,  sometimes  both, 
and  sometimes  neither.  After  the  organizing  of  the  con- 
vention the  credentials  committee  or  the  convention  as  a 
whole  could  seat  a  delegate  or  a  delegation  rejected  by  the 
state  committee.83  Through  their  power  of  settling 
contests,  therefore,  the  state  committee  in  the  first  place 
and  the  credentials  committee  in  the  second  could  in 
many  cases  practically  determine  the  result  of  the  con- 
vention. Although  the  credentials  committee  ordinarily 
conducted  hearings  and  sometimes  very  protracted  ones, 
its  decisions  were  determined  in  most  cases  by  factionalism 
and  expediency  rather  than  by  principles  of  judicial  fairness. 
In  Democratic  state  conventions  it  has  been  customary,  if 
the  credentials  committee  presents  a  unanimous  report,  not 
to  take  up  contests  on  the  floor  of  the  convention ;  if  there  is 
a  contest,  however,  it  has  usually  gone  to  the  convention. 

What  has  been  said  about  the  procedure  in  relation  to 
credentials  in  state  conventions  will  apply,  generally  speak- 
ing, to  the  local  conventions.  In  these  conventions,  how- 

82  Letter  from  D.  E.  Alward,  November,  1915. 

83  F.  W.  Waite,  who  is  familiar  with  Republican  convention  pro- 
cedure in  the  nineties,  writes:  "The  roll  as  made  by  the  committee  was 
practically  always  adopted.     I  think  in  1896  the  state  central  committee 
seated  the  Avery  faction  as  against  the  contending  faction  and  the 
temporary  organization  of  delegates  modified  this  by  giving  the  two 
delegations  one-half  a  vote  apiece;  more  as  a  matter  of  politics  than  of 
justice.     This  is  the  only  case  I  remember  where  the  committee  was 
reversed  or  modified." 


48  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [484 

ever,  the  selection  of  the  temporary  chairman  by  the  as- 
sembled delegates  and  the  selection  of  the  credentials  com- 
mittee by  him  considerably  increased  the  importance  of  the 
temporary  roll.  There  were  two  alternatives.  The  party 
committee  might  seat  both  of  the  contesting  delegations 
and  give  each  delegation  one  half  a  vote.  This  obviously 
put  a  premium  on  the  trumping  up  of  contests;  for  a  con- 
testing delegation,  however  chosen,  would  during  the  pre- 
liminary stage  of  the  convention  negative  a  regularly  chosen 
delegation.84  The  party  committee  might,  however,  seat 
one  of  the  contesting  delegations,  giving  it  a  vote  in  the 
preliminary  organization  of  the  convention.  It  is  denied 
that  this  was  done  in  Republican  state  conventions,  but 
it  was  done  in  other  conventions.  In  any  event,  to  give  a 
contested  delegation  a  voice  in  the  choice  of  its  own  judges 
and  a  vote  in  adopting  the  decision  of  the  judges  does  not 
appeal  to  one's  sense  of  abstract  justice.  When  contesting 
delegations  secured  access  to  the  convention  hall,  as  they 
frequently  did  in  local  conventions,  a  struggle  at  once  ensued 
over  the  selection  of  the  temporary  chairman  who  should 
name  the  credentials  committee.  At  this  point,  a  split 
was  most  likely  to  occur;  for  the  result  of  the  convention 
might  be  decided  by  the  votes  of  delegates  whom  the 
presiding  officer — the  chairman  of  the  party  committee — did 
not  consider  delegates  at  all. 

In  spite  of  the  difficulties  inherent  in  the  system  and 
asserting  themselves  constantly  in  practice,  and  in  spite  of 
the  inequitable  findings  of  credentials  committees,  the 
legislature  has  not  attempted  to  surround  the  preliminary 
organization  of  conventions  with  any  safeguards,85  and  the 
supreme  court  adopted  a  policy  of  non-interference  with 
party  organs.88  In  Beck  v.  Board  the  court  reviewed  the 
proceedings  in  a  senatorial  district  convention  which  had 
split  over  the  report  of  the  credentials  committee,  and  on 

84  For  an  interesting  example,  see  Detroit  Tribune,  July  16,  1902. 

84  Under  the  acts  of  1895  the  certificates  of  election  made  out  by  the 
primary  election  board  of  inspectors  was  to  constitute  the  credentials 
of  delegates  elected  at  the  primary. 

88  See  above,  page  igfi. 


485]    PARTY  COMMITTEES,  PRIMARIES,  AND  CONVENTIONS     49 

the  authority  of  party  usage  decided  as  to  the  validity  of 
the  convention  and  the  right  of  its  nominee  to  a  place  on 
the  ballot  to  the  exclusion  of  the  nominee  of  the  rump 
convention.87  Nevertheless  the  general  attitude  of  Michi- 
gan courts  toward  committees  on  credentials,  in  fact  toward 
party  organizations  in  general,  is  best  explained  in  a  later 
case,  Stephenson  v.  Board.88  Delegates  to  conventions, 
says  the  court, 

usually  come  armed  with  something  in  the  nature  of  credentials  and  it 
has  usually  been  supposed  that  the  assembly  itself  passes  upon  the 
authenticity  and  sufficiency  of  such  credentials,  and  it  has  been  quite 
common  for  conventions  to  admit  bystanders  from  an  unrepresented 
district  to  seats  as  representatives  of  their  locality,  although  without 
other  authority.  While  it  has  doubtless  been  the  common  practice  for 
chairmen  of  political  committees  to  use  the  gavel  to  procure  order  and 
silence,  to  read  the  call,  and  then  to  ask  the  assembly  its  further  will 
or  pleasure,  and  put  motions  until  a  temporary  chairman  is  chosen,  we 
have  not  understood  it  to  be  the  province  of  the  chairman  to  do  more,  or 
so  much  even,  if  against  the  will  of  the  assembly.  Certainly,  we  know 
of  no  rule  of  law  authorizing  it.  The  assembly  is  a  law  unto  itself  and 
has  uniformly  been  the  judge  of  the  qualification  of  its  own  members, 
and  its  decision  final. 

The  contention  of  the  relator  seems  to  be  based  upon  the  assumption 
that  the  assembly  cannot  be  trusted  to  faithfully  discharge  the  duty  of 
sifting  out  the  disqualified,  and  that  for  that  reason  there  must  be  some 
outside  authority  which  shall  have  power  to  determine 

the  qualification  of  delegates;  "and  they  claim  that  party 
custom  has  conferred  that  power  upon  the  committee." 
It  can  be  said  on  either  side  that  the  alternative  plan  can 
be  so  used  as  fraudulently  to  control  the  convention. 

These  difficulties  do  not  now  present  themselves  for  the  first  time. 
From  our  earliest  recollection,  party  politics  has  always  been  a  matter 
of  shrewdness  and  management,  not  always  defensible;  yet  the  people 
have  been  left  to  deal  with  the  difficulties  as  they  arise.  It  is  not  to  be 
supposed  that  committees  on  credentials,  however  fairly  selected,  have 
always  dealt  justly;  and,  no  doubt,  expediency  or  political  exigency  has 
governed  their  actions  to  the  exclusion  of  abstract  justice.  The  remedy 
has  been  either  a  bolt  on  the  part  of  the  dissatisfied,  and  the  selection 
of  an  opposition  candidate  within  the  party,  or  a  refusal  by  the  electors 
to  support  the  nominee;  and  the  courts  have  been  careful  not  to  inter- 
fere with  the  application  of  these  remedies  which  have  usually  been 
found  adequate. 

Since  the  convention  split,  the  court  must 

do  one  of  two  things,  viz:   Either  follow  the  precedents,  and  say  that 

87  103  Mich.  192  (1894). 

88  118  Mich.  396. 


5O  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [486 

we  will  not  decide  between  the  rival  factions,  or  ourselves  decide  who 
were  the  lawfully  elected  delegates  to  the  convention.  To  do  this,  we 
might  be  called  upon  to  investigate  every  ward  or  township  caucus  and 
county  convention  held  in  the  two  disputed  counties,  and,  had  either 
side  asked  it,  throughout  the  district.  We  have  intimated  that  the 
assembly  is  the  judge  of  the  qualification  of  its  members,  and  that  back 
of  its  decisions  we  cannot  go.  Its  presiding  officer  is  its  creature  and 
it  must  protect  itself.  In  turn,  its  voters  must  protect  themselves 
against  fraud  upon  their  convention  or  misconduct  of  its  delegates, 
officers,  and  candidates;  and  when  a  considerable  faction  of  a  convention 
leaves  the  meeting,  and  nominates  a  ticket,  claiming  to  be  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  party  which  called  the  convention,  it  is  not  the  province 
of  the  courts  to  determine  upon  technical  grounds  that  it  is  not,  and 
that  its  action  is  void,  and  deny  it  a  place  upon  the  ballot,  thereby  de- 
feating the  purification  of  methods  within  the  party,  or  to  say  which 
faction  was  right  and  which  wrong.  .  .  .  The  electors  must  decide 
between  them. 

Delegates  were  often  unwilling  or  unable  to  attend  con- 
ventions. In  such  cases  they  were  usually  represented 
either  by  proxies  or  by  substitutes  elected  by  the  remainder 
of  the  delegation;  and  it  was  a  rule  that  the  holder  of  the 
proxy  or  the  substitute  should  be  from  the  circumscription 
which  he  represented.89  The  buying  and  selling  of  proxies 
and  the  issuing  of  fraudulent  proxies  became  a  source  of 
considerable  corruption.  Many  conventions  ruled  them  out 
altogether  and  insisted  that  vacancies  should  be  filled  by 
the  delegation  itself.90  This  rule  was  made  law  in  i89591 
and  was  generally  observed  thereafter.  Delegates  usually 
paid  their  own  expenses  to  state  conventions;  but  in  the 
case  of  delegates  from  Wayne  County  to  contested  con- 
ventions it  was  not  uncommon  for  their  expenses  to  be 
paid  by  persons  interested  in  controlling  the  convention. 

The  committee  on  permanent  organization  and  order  of 
business,  although  less  important  than  the  committee  on 
credentials,  was  nevertheless  frequently  utilized  in  the 
strategy  of  the  convention.  It  reported  the  permanent 
officers,  the  order  of  business,  and  the  method  of  voting, 
and  in  doing  so  sometimes  devised  ingenious  schemes  to 
control  the  selection  of  delegates  or  nominations.  One 

89  Detroit  Tribune,  April  30,  1896. 

90  Detroit  Free  Press,  June  21,  22,  28,  September  16,  October  17, 
1894;  Detroit  Tribune,  September  2,  5,  27,  1894,  March  13,  1895,  May 
27,  1904;  Proceedings  of  the  Democratic  National  Convention,  1896. 

91  Local  Acts,  1895,  No.  411;  Public  Acts,  1895,  No.  135. 


487]    PARTY  COMMITTEES,  PRIMARIES,  AND  CONVENTIONS     51 

device  was  to  change  the  geographical  basis  of  selection  of 
delegates,  for  one  faction  of  the  convention  sometimes  con- 
trolled a  majority  of  the  districts  and  the  opposing  faction 
controlled  a  majority  of  the  counties.  Disfranchising 
schemes  of  this  kind  were  probably  more  common  in  local 
than  in  state  conventions. 

The  following  was  the  order  of  business  in  the  Republican 
state  delegate  convention  in  1892 :9i  (i)  report  of  credentials 
committee;  (2)  vote  on  making  temporary  organization 
permanent;  (3)  election  of  delegates  at  large;  (4)  nomination 
of  two  electors  at  large  and  one  from  each  district;  (5) 
election  of  chairman  of  state  central  committee;  (6)  con- 
firmation of  members  of  state  central  committee  from 
districts;  (7)  report  of  resolutions  committee;  (8)  adjourn- 
ment. 

Pursuant  to  the  law  of  1887,  the  permanent  officers  of 
nominating  conventions  were  sworn  in  by  a  notary.  To 
bind  delegates  to  certain  action  they  were  often  instructed 
and  the  unit  rule  was  adopted.  In  some  counties  it  seems 
to  have  been  customary  to  instruct,  in  others  not  to  in- 
struct.93 During  this  period  there  were  isolated  cases  of 
rump  conventions  growing  out  of  local  contests,  but  except 
in  1896  there  was  no  state-wide  bolting  movement. 

Michigan  experience  in  the  period  under  consideration 
affords  a  basis  for  three  fairly  definite  conclusions.  In  the 
first  place,  conventions  were  not  representative.  The 
delegates  were  not  drawn  from  all  classes  of  men,  but  were 
too  largely  office-holders  and  their  dependents  and  other 
professional  politicians.  In  local  conventions  delegates 
from  the  country  districts  were  practically  powerless,  the 
city  lawyers  usually  dominating  the  proceedings.  Men 
who  were  not  delegates  at  all  frequently  took  part  in  pro- 
ceedings on  the  floor,  and  were  still  more  frequently  in- 
fluential in  proceedings  off  the  floor.  The  arbitrary  rulings 
of  the  chairman,  the  unfair  handling  of  contests,  the  ar- 
rangement of  committees,  or  the  unofficial  power  of  a  boss 

92  Detroit  Tribune,  April  15,  1892. 

MIbid.,  July  3,  1892,  April  20,  May  1,1896;  Detroit  Free  Press, 
July  20,  1892. 


52  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [488 

frequently  determined  the  result  of  conventions  and  actually 
disfranchised  a  majority  of  the  delegates.  Above  all,  con- 
ventions did  not  represent  in  their  nominations  the  public 
opinion  of  the  party.  With  the  exception  of  that  of  Pingree, 
it  is  doubtful  if  a  single  Republican  gubernatorial  nomina- 
tion in  this  period  represented  a  substantial  demand  of  the 
party  membership.  Dummy  candidates  were  sometimes 
put  up  to  divide  the  vote  and  make  it  possible  to  nominate  a 
minority  candidate.  The  studied  ascertainment  of  party 
sentiment  was  a  negligible  element  in  the  making  of  nomi- 
nations; an  equally  ineffective  check  in  Republican  con- 
ventions was  the  prospect  of  defeat.  Having  their  origin 
in  a  party  opinion  which  found  in  the  primaries  an  attenu- 
ated and  incoherent  expression,  convention  nominations 
were  the  final  result  of  a  series  of  filtrations  which  removed 
every  vestige  of  responsibility.  This  is  not  to  imply, 
however,  that  nominations  in  all  cases  were  bad;  for  some 
candidates,  such  as  those  for  the  supreme  court,  were 
notably  good. 

In  the  second  place,  conventions  were  not  deliberative. 
There  was  much  manipulation  and  wire-pulling  and  little 
discussion.  Slates  made  debate  superfluous.  Participa- 
tion in  conventions  was  not  looked  upon  as  an  honor  or  a 
responsibility.  Disorder  and  fights  were  frequent  in  local 
conventions,  which  were  sometimes  practically  unmanage- 
able mobs.  It  is  true  that  old  politicians  refer  to  a  time 
when  the  nominating  system  was  ideal,  when  conventions 
were  councils  where  party  leaders  met  and  arrived  at  rational 
and  wise  decisions;  but  this  time  had  evidently  passed  long 
before  1890.  State  conventions  were  less  demoralizing, 
more  orderly,  more  dignified,  and  higher  in  tone  than  local 
conventions.  Democratic  and  third-party  state  conven- 
tions were  more  deliberative  than  were  Republican  state 
conventions,  but  mainly  for  the  reason  that  their  prizes 
were  not  worth  fighting  for. 

Thirdly,  methods  used  in  conventions  were  often  corrupt. 
In  conventions,  especially  in  Detroit,  where  several  candi- 
dates were  to  be  nominated — for  example,  for  the  legislature 


489]    PARTY  COMMITTEES,  PRIMARIES,  AND  CONVENTIONS     53 

— a  slate  was  sometimes  arranged,  places  on  the  slate  were 
bought,  and  a  "pot"  was  collected  to  push  the  slate 
through.94  In  other  cases  where  money  did  not  figure  so 
conspicuously  in  the  making  of  the  slate,  nominations  were 
effected  by  deals  and  trades  in  which  no  one  of  the  nominees 
could  command  a  majority  of  the  delegates.95  The  saloon 
influence,  exerted  in  a  variety  of  ways,  was  common  in 
county  and  city,  and  was  not  absent  from  even  state 
conventions.  Delegates  were  influenced  commonly  by 
patronage  and  by  personal  connections,  which  amounted  in 
many  cases  to  bribery,  and  the  actual  use  of  money  in 
conventions  was  frequent.  The  act  of  1887  declared  the 
accepting  of  money  or  the  offer  of  place  or  position  or  other 
valuable  consideration  by  a  delegate  a  misdemeanor;96  and 
the  acts  of  1895  made  it  a  misdemeanor  to  solicit  money 
from  candidates  or  to  offer  money  or  place  to  a  delegate.97 
These  provisions,  however,  seem  to  have  been  generally 
ineffective.  More  money  was  used  in  primaries  and  con- 
ventions in  1900  and  1902  than  ever  before;  and,  although 
more  was  used  in  the  primaries  than  in  the  conventions  and 
much  was  spent  legitimately,  nevertheless  in  these  and 
other  years  an  indefinite  amount  of  money,  but  certainly  a 
large  amount,  was  used  corruptly  in  conventions,  state  as 
well  as  local.  Money  was  passed  openly  on  the  floor  of 
conventions.98  Conditions  seemed  to  be  growing  worse, 
and  it  became  a  truism  that  a  poor  man  without  powerful 
associates  had  small  chance  of  securing  a  nomination.99 

94  Detroit  Tribune,  October  12,  1890,  October  9,  12,  13,  1892. 

95  Ibid.,  March  14,  1893. 

96  Public  Acts,  1887,  No.  303. 

97  Public  Acts,  1895,  No.  135;  Local  Acts,  1895,  No.  411. 

98  Detroit  Tribune,  October  13,  1892,  June  9,  1894,  April  30,  1896, 
October  30,  1898,  June  30,  October  27,  1900.     "Money  has  been  paid 
freely  and  openly  on  convention  floors"  (Governor  Pingree's  outgoing 
message,  1901,  in  Journal  of  the  House  of  Representatives  of  the  State 
of  Michigan,  1901,  vol.  I,  p.  29).     "Syndicates  of  office-seekers  are 
formed,  corrupt  combinations  are  made,  delegates  are  bought  and  sold, 
promises  of  position  to  unworthy  men  are  often  of  necessity  made.  .  .  . 
The  convention  has  become  the  medium  of  trickery,  bribery  and  fraud  " 
(Governor  Pingree's  message,  in  Detroit  Tribune,  January  8,  1897). 

99  A  Republican  politician  said  in  1903:  "  Under  the  present  arrange- 
ments, a  man  without  money  or  without  an  'angel,'  who  aspires  to  any 


54  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [490 

The  increase  of  corruption  and  the  deterioration  of  con- 
ventions is  attributed  generally  to  the  entrance  into  politics 
of  corporations,  which  through  their  attorneys  and  the 
liberal  use  of  money  participated  in  both  conventions  and 
campaigns.  Originally  this  participation  seems  to  have 
been  largely  a  defensive  move  against  blackmailing  bills  in 
the  legislature;  but  the  activities  of  corporations  steadily 
increased  in  thoroughness  and  extent,  and  at  the  same  time 
developed  a  new  and  corrupt  class  of  convention  managers. 
In  state  politics  the  Michigan  Central  Railroad  was  believed 
to  be  the  most  powerful  element,  and  in  the  upper  peninsula 
the  mining  corporations  exercised  a  pretty  constant  control 
over  local  conventions. 

Nevertheless  conventions  served  useful  purposes.  They 
kept  the  organization  alive;  they  stimulated  and  focused 
party  enthusiasm;  they  tended  to  obliterate  or  satisfy 
factions.  These  more  favorable  considerations  will  be 
treated  in  a  later  chapter. 

Fusion. — In  1894  A.  M.  Todd  was  nominated  for  Con- 
gress in  the  third  district  by  the  Prohibitionists,  the  People's 
party,  the  Union  Silver  party,  and  finally  by  the  Democrats. 
The  Republicans  had  reason  to  fear  that  this  combination 
would  carry  the  district.  They  had  a  majority  in  the 
legislature,  however,  and  shortly  before  the  election  passed  a 
law  providing  that  the  name  of  a  candidate  nominated  by 
more  than  one  party  should  not  appear  in  more  than  one 
column  of  the  official  ballot.100  It  was  charged  that  the 
purpose  of  the  law  was  purely  partisan,  and  it  is  significant 
that  Mr.  Todd's  opponent  was  then  lieutenant-governor 
and  president  of  the  state  senate,101  When  a  mandamus 
suit  was  brought  into  the  supreme  court  before  the  election, 
the  four  Republicans  on  the  bench  upheld  the  law,  the  one 
Democrat  entering  a  dissenting  opinion.102  The  attorney- 
general  held  later  that  the  law  did  not  apply  to  local  city, 

high  office  at  the  present  time,  has  his  candidacy  treated  as  a  joke,  and 
we  look  at  such  a  man  as  having  no  chance  of  winning  "(Detroit  Tribune, 
March  13,  1903). 

100  Public  Acts,  1895,  No.  271. 

101  Correspondence  with  A.  M.  Todd,  November  3,  1915. 

102  Todd  v.  Board,  104  Mich.  474. 


49l]    PARTY  COMMITTEES,  PRIMARIES,  AND  CONVENTIONS     55 

village,  and  township  elections.103  On  account  of  this  law, 
the  Democratic,  People's,  and  Union  Silver  parties  did  not 
fuse  in  1896,  but  adopted  a  joint  name  and  made  joint 
nominations.  They  held  separate  conventions  on  the  same 
day,  and  each  convention  appointed  a  conference  committee 
of  five  members.  The  committee  of  fifteen  agreed  that 
nominations  should  be  made  as  follows :  by  the  Union  Silver 
party,  a  candidate  for  governor;  by  the  People's  party, 
candidates  for  auditor-general  and  state  land  commissioner; 
and  by  the  Democratic  party,  candidates  for  the  remaining 
state  offices.104  After  nominating  state  officers  the  delegates 
to  the  three  conventions  met  together  and  nominated 
presidential  electors.  During  the  campaign  the  three 
parties  maintained  separate  organizations,  the  three  state 
central  committees  occasionally  holding  joint  meetings,105 
and  their  candidates  were  placed  on  the  ballot  in  one  column 
under  a  hyphenated  name.  Similar  procedure  was  fol- 
lowed in  1898  with  a  different  apportionment  of  offices.108 
In  1899  the  three  parties  came  together  in  one  convention,107 
and  in  1900  the  Populists  and  the  Silverites  were  practically 
absorbed  into  the  Democratic  ranks.  In  1904  the  strength 
of  the  fusion  idea  in  the  Democratic  party  was  shown  by 
the  fact  that  J.  S.  Stearns,  who  had  twice  been  defeated  for 
the  Republican  nomination  for  governor,  came  near  securing 
a  majority  in  the  Democratic  convention.108 

103  Report  of  the  Attorney-General,  1899,  p.  100. 

104  Detroit  Tribune,  August  26,  27,  1896.     The  nomination  for  secre- 
tary of  state  was  at  the  time  left  vacant,  with  the  expectation  that  it 
would  be  filled  later  by  the  National  party. 

105  Detroit  Free  Press,  September  29,  1896;  Detroit  Tribune,  Novem- 
ber 26,  1896. 

106  Detroit  Tribune,  June  22,  1898. 

107  Detroit  Free  Press,  March  9,  1899. 

108  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  August  4,  1904. 


CHAPTER  III 
DIRECT  PRIMARY  LEGISLATION 

The  first  local  direct  nomination  law  in  Michigan  was 
passed  in  1901,  the  first  general  law  in  1905.  The  public 
opinion,  however,  which  looked  to  the  abolition  of  the  con- 
vention system  of  nomination  rather  than  to  its  legal 
regulation  had  its  inception  as  early  as  1894.  The  unusually 
objectionable  primaries  of  that  year  led  to  a  pronounced  but 
unorganized  agitation  for  reform,  in  the  course  of  which  a 
few  of  the  most  radical  citizens  proposed  to  abolish  ab- 
solutely all  conventions.1  As  we  have  seen,  however,  the 
legislature  of  1895  contented  itself  with  attempting  the 
regulation  of  primaries  and  conventions,  leaving  most  of 
the  nominating  machinery  in  the  control  of  the  party 
organization.  Nevertheless,  as  early  as  1896  the  Repub- 
licans of  Battle  Creek  decided  in  mass-meeting  to  do  away 
with  the  city  convention  and  to  nominate  city  officers 
directly  in  the  ward  primaries.2 

Early  Attempts. — With  the  election  of  Hazen  S.  Pingree 
to  the  governorship  in  1896,  the  movement  for  direct 
nominations  entered  the  stage  of  legislative  debate.  In  his 
first  message  Governor  Pingree  laid  marked  emphasis  on 
the  direct  nomination  issue.3  In  this  session  several  bills 
relating  to  this  matter  were  drafted  and  introduced  but 
none  were  passed.4  Members  of  the  legislature  from  Detroit 
were  very  prominent  in  the  attempt  to  secure  the  enact- 
ment of  a  direct  nomination  law.  In  1898  public  opinion, 

1  Detroit  Tribune,  November  10,  n,  12,  13,  14,  1894;  Detroit  Free 
Press,  November  16,  1894. 

2  Detroit  Free  Press,  March  14,  1896. 

3  Detroit  Tribune,  January  8,  1897. 

4  Ibid.,  January  8,  February  20,  March  2,  6,  1897;  House  Journal, 
1897.  PP-  103,  571,  638,  643,  662,  717,  762;  Senate  Journal,  1897,  pp. 
210,  296,  366. 


493]  DIRECT   PRIMARY  LEGISLATION  57 

especially  in  Detroit,5  was  crystallizing.  For  the  first  time 
direct  nominations  were  discussed  by  the  Michigan  Political 
Science  Association,  which  had  been  organized  in  i893.6 
In  his  message  in  1899  Governor  Pingree  urged  the  passing 
of  a  law  which  should  apply  "to  all  candidates  for  each 
elective  office,  from  governor  down  to  township  and  ward 
officers."7  Representative  Colby  of  Wayne  County  intro- 
duced five  direct  nomination  bills,  two  general  and  three  to 
apply  only  to  Wayne  County;8  but  the  only  result  of  the 
session  was  the  amending  of  the  acts  of  1887  and  1895. 9 
The  opposition  argument  most  frequently  heard  was  that 
the  direct  primary  would  destroy  the  party  organization 
and  would  give  to  the  cities  a  monopoly  of  the  nominations 
at  the  expense  of  the  country  districts.10  In  this  session, 
however,  the  majority  of  the  farmers  in  the  legislature  which 
opposed  direct  nominations  was  not  significantly  large,11 
and  was  probably  due  more  to  the  native  conservatism  of 
the  farmer  than  to  a  feeling  that  the  legislation  would  be 
contrary  to  his  class  interests. 

The  corrupt  gubernatorial  campaign  of  1900  greatly 
strengthened  the  sentiment  for  direct  nominations;  and  in 
Wayne  County  a  majority  of  the  Republican  senatorial  and 
legislative  conventions  and  candidates  endorsed  the  direct 
nomination  principle.12  In  his  address  in  1901  at  the  close 
of  his  term  Governor  Pingree  dwelt  at  length  on  the  need 
for  direct  nominations;  but  the  incoming  executive  made 
no  recommendation  on  the  subject.13  There  was  no  dearth 
of  bills,  however;  and  the  most  important  ones  passed  the 
Lower  House,  being  opposed  by  some  of  the  agricultural 

5  Grand    Rapids    Herald,    November    9,    1898;    Detroit    Tribune, 
October  6,  November  3,  12,  24,  26,  1898. 
8  Detroit  Tribune,  November  20,  1898. 

7  Detroit  Free  Press,  January  6,  1899. 

8  House  Journal,  1899,  pp.  217,  520,  521,  591. 

9  See  above,  page  3off . 

10  Detroit  Free  Press,  February  18,  1899;  Detroit  Journal,  February 
II,  1899. 

11  On  one  vote  in  the  House  19  of  the  39  farmers  voting  favored  the 
bill  (House  Journal,  1899,  p.  1070).     In  the  Senate  two  of  the  six  far- 
mers voting  favored  the  bill  (Senate  Journal,  1899,  p.  1288). 

12  Detroit  Tribune,  February  8,  March  26,  1901. 

13  House  Journal,  1901,  pp.  29,  30. 


58  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [494 

members,  by  office-holders,  and  by  machine  politicians  in 
general,  some  of  whom  expressed  the  fear  that  direct  nomi- 
nations would  "bring  Pingree  back."14  In  addition  to  the 
arguments  used  in  the  previous  session,  it  was  now  con- 
tended that  the  direct  primary  would  be  too  expensive,  that 
it  would  facilitate  manipulation,15  and  that  it  would  unduly 
increase  the  power  of  the  newspapers.  It  was  also  held 
that  the  farmers  would  not  attend  the  primary  elections.16 
The  session  resulted  in  the  enactment  of  three  laws  affecting 
party  organizations :  a  law  supposed  to  have  been  passed  at 
machine  dictation  abolishing  off-year  elections  in  Detroit 
and  merging  the  city  with  the  general  elections  ;17a  law 
regulating  convention  procedure  in  Kent  County;18  and  a 
law  providing  for  direct  nominations  in  the  city  of  Grand 
Rapids,19  which,  after  a  trial  in  the  March  primaries,  was 
superseded  by  a  more  detailed  law  passed  during  the  same 
session  of  the  legislature.20 

These  local  acts  for  Grand  Rapids,  which  in  their  main 
provisions  were  identical,  provided  that  primary  elections  in 
that  city  should  be  controlled  by  the  general  election  officials 
and  in  details  not  specifically  covered  by  these  special  acts 
should  be  governed  by  the  general  election  laws;  that  in  the 
direct  primary  should  be  nominated  all  candidates  for 
elective  city  offices,  judges,  representatives  and  senators  in 
the  state  legislature,  and  all  other  elective  officers  chosen  in 
the  city  except  elected  members  of  school  boards;  that  the 
primary  should  be  held  on  the  third  Tuesday  preceding  the 
general  fall  election  and  on  the  third  Tuesday  preceding  the 
city  election;  that  to  secure  a  place  on  the  primary  ballot 
candidates  should  file  a  personal  affidavit  and  pay  a  fee 
which  for  the  principal  offices  amounted  to  fifteen  dollars; 
that  separate  ballots  uniform  in  size  and  color  should  be 

14  Detroit  Tribune,  January  19,  23,  February  10,  March  22,  1901. 

15  Ibid.,  files  for  February,  1901. 

16  Ibid.,  February  8,  1901. 

"Local  Acts,  1901,  No.  437;  Detroit  Tribune,  March  23,  26,  1901. 
18  See  above,  page  41. 

"Local  Acts,  1901,  No.  292.     In  effect  February,  1901.     The  first 
primary  elections  under  it  were  held  on  March  5,  1901. 
20  Local  Acts,  1901,  No.  471.     In  effect  June  6,  1901. 


495]  DIRECT   PRIMARY  LEGISLATION  59 

printed  for  the  different  parties ;  that  the  voter  should  state 
his  party  affiliation  when  he  received  his  ballot;  and  that 
the  candidates  nominated  at  the  primary  should  select  the 
chairman  and  the  secretary  of  the  city  and  legislative 
campaign  committees.  The  acts  also  made  provision  for 
the  nomination  of  independent  candidates  by  mass  con- 
ventions. 

In  1902  the  popular  demand  for  the  direct  primary  became 
more  general  and  more  insistent.  Democratic  and  Repub- 
lican conventions  alike  endorsed  it,  and  conventions  in 
rural  as  well  as  in  urban  counties  favored  it.21  It  was  the 
chief  issue  in  the  Republican  preconvention  canvass  and  in 
the  campaign.22  The  renomination  and  reelection  of  one 
who  had  been  characterized  as  a  barrel  candidate  and  a 
machine  governor  served  to  intensify  the  demand  for  legis- 
lative action.  Some  county  committees  voluntarily  tried 
the  direct  nomination  plan.  In  Wayne  County  the  chair- 
man of  the  Republican  county  committee,  advised  by  lead- 
ing Republicans,  worked  out  the  details  of  a  plan  which  was 
adopted  by  three  of  the  four  senatorial  district  committees. 
It  was  put  into  operation  on  October  17,  but,  on  account  of 
the  lack  of  legal  safeguards,  failed  to  give  general  satis- 
faction.23 In  Washtenaw  County  the  chairman  of  the 
Republican  county  committee  instituted  a  direct  primary 
which  was  less  successful  than  the  one  in  Wayne  County, 
owing  in  this  case  to  the  refusal  of  the  anti-Judson  Repub- 
licans to  participate  and  to  the  fact  that  the  regular  nomi- 
nating convention  was  held  as  usual  after  the  primary 
election.24 

Further  Local  Legislation. — Governor  Bliss  in  his  message 
to  the  legislature  in  1903  recommended  a  "satisfactory 
primary  election  law."25  The  opposition  of  the  farmers, 
from  the  first  probably  nursed  and  exaggerated  by  the  poli- 

21  Detroit  Tribune,  May  21,  June  u,  July  26,  1902. 

22  Ibid.,  May  29,  June  22,  24,  August  I,  1902. 

23  Ibid.,  June  4,  27,  September  n,  17,  October  5,  17,  18,  20,  1902. 

24  Ibid.,  August   i,   1902.     Letter  from  former  County  Chairman 
Green,  September  15,  1915. 

28  Detroit  Tribune,  January  9,  1903. 


6O  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [496 

ticians,  had  now  apparently  disappeared.  The  State 
Grange  and  the  State  Association  of  Farmers'  Clubs  declared 
for  direct  primaries.26  At  a  referendum  election  the  people 
of  Kent  County  outside  of  the  city  of  Grand  Rapids  voted 
for  the  application  of  the  system  to  the  whole  county.27  In 
addition  to  the  familiar  objections  already  mentioned  it  was 
argued  in  opposition  to  the  bill  that  came  nearest  to  enact- 
ment that  the  putting  of  registration  and  the  primary 
election  on  the  same  day  would  encourage  "colonization;" 
that  the  bill  aimed  at  the  destruction  of  the  minority  party; 
and  that  the  convention  system  was  necessary  for  the 
adoption  of  party  platforms.28  The  most  persistent  ob- 
jection was  that  the  direct  primary  would  hurt  the  organ- 
ization.29 The  upper  peninsula  members  based  their  op- 
position on  the  supposed  difficulty  under  direct  primaries  of 
apportioning  nominations  equitably  among  the  various 
nationalities.30  The  result  of  this  legislative  session  was 
the  passing  of  three  local  acts:  one  for  Wayne  County,  one 
for  Muskegon  County,31  and  a  new  one  for  Kent  County. 
General  Legislation. — In  the  gubernatorial  campaign  of 
1904  the  question  of  the  adoption  of  the  direct  primary 
was  still  the  most  pressing  issue.  Public  opinion  seemed 
unanimous  in  demanding  the  new  nominating  method.32 
Endorsements  came  from  the  League  of  Michigan  Munici- 
palities, the  Michigan  Political  Science  Association,  the 
State  Association  of  Farmers'  Clubs,  the  State  Grange,  and 
the  State  Convention  of  Fremont  Voters.33  The  State 
League  of  Republican  Clubs,  representing  the  younger 
element  of  the  party,  was  active  in  creating  sentiment  for  a 

26  Detroit  Tribune,  January  30,  February  19,  1903.    ; 

27  The  majority  in  the  county  was  about  8000  (Grand  Rapids  Herald, 
April  21,  1903).     The  vote  in  the  city  of  Grand  Rapids  was:  for,  8008; 
against,  2134  (ibid.,  April  7,  1903). 

28  Detroit  Tribune,  April  9,  1903. 

29  Ibid.,  February  22,  1903. 

30  Ibid.,  March  8,  April  3,  1902;  January  20,  February  26,  1903. 

31  Local  Acts,  1903,  Nos.  291,  326,  502. 

32  Butterfield,  p.  9. 

33  Detroit  Tribune,  February  1 1,  April  2,  May  19,  November  2, 
1904. 


497]  DIRECT   PRIMARY  LEGISLATION  6 1 

direct  primary.34  Both  the  Republican  city  and  county 
committees  in  Wayne  County  favored  the  new  system.35 
The  opposition  of  conservative  Republicans  and  machine 
leaders  was  now  centered  chiefly  on  the  application  of  the 
direct  nomination  principle  to  general  state  offices;  but 
these  men  insisted  that,  even  in  the  counties  and  the  dis- 
tricts, the  proposition  should  be  subject  to  party  referenda. 
This  was  the  position  taken  by  the  two  Republican  state 
conventions36  and  by  the  Republican  nominee  for  governor.37 
In  the  first  congressional  district,  which  was  coextensive 
with  Wayne  County,  the  Republican  congressional  district 
committee  voluntarily  adopted  a  direct  primary  plan  for 
the  selection  of  delegates  and  alternates  to  the  national 
convention;  and  anti-machine  delegates  were  chosen  by 
large  majorities.38  The  Wayne  County  Republican  com- 
mittee decided  to  do  away  with  the  county  convention  and 
to  vote  directly  for  delegates  to  the  state  nominating  con- 
vention.39 

In  Alpena  County  the  Republican  county  convention 
voluntarily  adopted  by  a  vote  of  61  to  5  the  direct  nomi- 
nation system  for  all  county  officers,  county  committees, 
and  delegates  to  all  conventions.40  The  Democrats  declared 
for  general  direct  primary  legislation,  and  on  this  issue  their 
candidate  for  governor  polled  an  unusually  large  vote. 
Unmistakable  indications  of  the  strength  of  the  public 
demand  convinced  the  Republicans  that  a  general  direct 
primary  law  of  some  kind  must  be  enacted.  Machine 
leaders  and  members  from  the  upper  peninsula  directed 
their  efforts,  not  to  defeat  the  legislation,  but  to  make 
minimum  concessions  and  to  render  the  system  difficult  of 
operation.  The  act  which  finally  emerged  with  the  gover- 
nor's signature  is  a  curious  sample  of  the  handiwork  of  a 

84  Detroit  Tribune,  March  24, 1904;  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  February 
22,  May  18,  1904. 

36  Detroit  Tribune,  March  25,  1904. 

36  Ibid.,  May  19,  July  I,  1904. 

37  Ibid.,  February  10,  II,  1904. 

38  Ibid.,  May  10,  12, 17,  19, 1904. 

39  Ibid.,  May  29,  June  10,  22,  1904. 

40  Ibid.,  June  19,  1904. 


62  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [498 

state  legislature,  and  there  is  reason  for  believing  that  the 
law  was  deliberately  framed  so  that  it  would  not  work. 

This  law41  applied  to  no  elective  state  administrative 
officers  except  governor  and  lieutenant-governor,  and  left  the 
adoption  of  direct  nominations  optional  with  the  parties, 
prescribing  that  a  separate  referendum  election  should  be 
held  in  each  city,  county,  legislative  district,  and  congres- 
sional district,  following  the  circulation  of  independent 
petitions  for  the  election  in  each  of  these  subdivisions. 
Furthermore  in  the  referendum  elections  and  in  the  sub- 
sequent primary  elections  only  enrolled  members  of  any 
party  could  vote.  Voters  might  enroll  at  the  April  election, 
but  enrollment  was  purely  voluntary.  The  referendum 
election  was  to  take  place  on  the  petition  of  twenty  per  cent 
of  the  party  vote  for  governor  in  the  last  election.  It  is 
apparent  that  twenty  per  cent  of  the  party  vote  in  the 
November  election  represented  a  larger  number  than 
twenty  per  cent  of  the  enrolled  vote;  for  the  vote  in  the 
April  election  is  always  less  than  in  the  November  election, 
and  not  all  those  voting  would  enroll.  It  is  true  that  the 
important  question  of  nominating  candidates  for  governor 
and  lieutenant-governor  was  to  be  submitted  to  each  party 
without  previous  petitioning,  but  on  the  adoption  of  the 
proposition  only  enrolled  party  members  could  vote.  To 
resubmit  the  question  of  the  direct  nomination  of  governor 
and  lieutenant-governor  petitions  signed  by  only  twenty 
per  cent  of  the  enrolled  party  members  were  required,  a 
more  lenient  requirement  than  that  for  the  original  sub- 
mission of  the  proposition.  The  law  provided,  moreover, 
that  in  order  to  be  nominated  at  all  a  candidate  for  governor 
must  have  received  forty  per  cent  of  the  votes  cast  at  the 
primary  election.  Otherwise,  the  nomination  was  to  be 
made  in  convention. 

The  law  provided  for  the  nomination  of  candidates  for 
city  and  county  offices,  the  legislature,  and  Congress,  and 
for  governor  and  lieutenant-governor.  Primary  elections 
were  to  occur  on  three  dates :  for  city  officers  on  the  second 

41  Public  Acts,  1905,  No.  181. 


499]  DIRECT   PRIMARY  LEGISLATION  63 

Tuesday  preceding  the  city  election,  for  delegates  to  con- 
ventions on  the  second  Tuesday  in  June,  and  for  nomi- 
nations on  the  first  Tuesday  in  September.  Two  oppor- 
tunities were  allowed  for  enrollment,  on  the  first  Monday 
in  April  and  on  primary  election  day  for  those  previously 
unable  to  enroll,  but  there  was  no  provision  for  the  enroll- 
ment of  independents.  Each  party  was  to  have  a  separate 
ballot.  Candidates  in  the  primary  were  required  to  file 
petitions  signed  by  a  number  of  enrolled  voters  equal  to 
two  per  cent  of  the  party  vote  for  governor,  and  no  fees 
were  exacted.  The  voter  was  expected  to  write  on  the 
ballot  the  names  of  delegates  to  conventions.  Any  elector 
"legally  qualified  and  enrolled"  might  vote  in  the  primary, 
but  he  must  ask  for  his  party  ticket,  and  if  challenged  must 
swear  to  his  party  affiliation.  The  law  made  no  provision 
for  the  election  of  committees,  but  provided  that  all  county 
conventions  of  any  party  should  be  held  on  a  day  to  be 
designated  by  the  state  central  committee  and  to  be  within 
seven  days  after  the  primary  election.  The  state  conven- 
tion was  to  take  place  within  sixty  days  after  the  primary 
election,  the  date  and  place  to  be  fixed  by  the  state  central 
committee.  The  law  provided  for  the  nomination  of  can- 
didates of  new  parties,  and  their  petitions  were  to  be  signed 
by  a  number  of  electors  equal  to  one  per  cent  of  the  total 
vote  for  governor  in  the  last  election. 

The  same  legislature — 1905 — passed  a  local  act  for 
Alpena  County  which  contained  some  features  at  variance 
with  the  public  act.  The  Alpena  act42  provided  for  the 
direct  nomination  of  all  candidates  except  those  for  school 
district  and  possibly  village  offices,  for  the  election  and 
almost  complete  organization  of  the  city  and  county  com- 
mittees, and  for  the  filing  of  petitions  not  only  by  candidates 
for  office  but  by  delegates  to  conventions.  The  chief  in- 
novation, however,  was  the  provision  that  candidates  for 
the  principal  county  and  city  offices  must  receive  at  least 
twenty-five  per  cent  of  all  votes  cast  at  the  primary ;  and  if 
no  candidate  for  nomination  to  a  particular  office  received 

42  Local  Acts,  1905,  Nos.  476,  620. 


64  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [500 

the  required  percentage,  a  second  primary  should  be  held  a 
week  later  at  which  the  two  leading  candidates  in  the  first 
primary  should  again  be  voted  for. 

Repealing  the  Wayne  County  act  of  1903,  the  legislature 
passed  another  act43  which  provided  for  the  election  of 
ward,  city,  and  county  committees,  a  choice  by  the  candi- 
date between  the  payment  of  a  fee  and  the  filing  of  a  peti- 
tion, a  separate  ballot  for  each  party,  challenges  on  the 
ground  of  party  affiliation,  a  change  in  the  date  of  the 
primary  election  and  the  holding  of  the  fall  primary  on 
three  consecutive  days  in  presidential  years  and  on  two 
days  in  other  years,  nominations  by  new  parties  or  non- 
partisan  organizations,  and  the  legalization  of  the  mass 
convention  as  an  alternative  method  of  nomination  for  old 
and  new  parties  alike.  The  legislature  of  1905  also  amended 
the  Kent  and  Muskegon  acts  so  as  to  abolish  the  fee  system, 
which  had  been  declared  unconstitutional  by  the  state 
supreme  court.44 

The  referenda  on  direct  nominations  in  1905  were  in  both 
parties  overwhelmingly  favorable.  Of  55,960  Republicans 
who  voted,  46,447  favored  the  new  method.  Of  15,022 
Democrats,  only  2070  voted  in  the  negative.  There  was  an 
unfavorable  majority  in  only  two  of  the  eighty-three  coun- 
ties, Cass  and  Tuscola.  The  latter  county  was  controlled 
at  the  time  by  the  most  prominent  boss  in  the  State.45  In 
Kent  County,  where  direct  primaries  had  been  tried  longest, 
ninety-six  per  cent  of  the  Republicans  and  ninety-seven 
per  cent  of  the  Democrats  voted  for  the  local  application  of 
the  law.  The  majorities  in  the  upper  peninsula  were  large, 
although  less  than  in  the  lower  peninsula.46 

In  his  messages  to  the  legislature  in  1907  Governor 
Warner  recommended  a  change  in  the  primary  law  to  make 
the  primaries  less  expensive  to  the  candidates  and  to  the 

43  Local  Acts,  1905,  No.  345. 

"Local  Acts,  1905,  Nos.  340,  341;  Dapper  v.  Smith,  138  Mich.  104 
(1904).  The  legislature  also  passed  an  act  providing  for  the  direct 
nomination  of  the  circuit  judge  in  the  fourteenth  judicial  circuit  (Local 
Acts,  1905,  No.  341). 

45  T.  W.  Atwood  (Detroit  Free  Press,  June  13,  1906). 

46  Ibid.,  June  23,  1906. 


5Ol]  DIRECT   PRIMARY  LEGISLATION  65 

public;  he  also  recommended  a  change  in  the  number  of 
signatures  required  on  petitions,  a  provision  for  one  primary 
day  for  both  delegates  and  candidates,  the  adding  of  party 
enrollment  to  the  various  local  acts,  and  the  regulation  of  the 
use  of  money  in  the  primaries.  He  urged  the  enactment  of 
a  corrupt  practice  law  and  act  providing  for  the  publishing 
of  primary  expenditures.47  The  legislature  passed  a  general 
act48  which  repealed  the  law  of  1905  except  as  to  the  pro- 
visions for  party  enrollment.  This  act  left  the  adoption  of 
direct  primaries  optional  with  the  parties  and  the  localities 
in  the  case  of  district,  county,  and  city  offices;  but  in  addi- 
tion to  the  mandatory  provisions  for  the  nomination  of 
candidates  for  governor  and  lieutenant-governor,  it  made 
similar  provision  for  candidates  for  United  States  senator. 
This  law  afforded  an  opportunity  for  the  enrollment  of 
independents,  for  a  change  of  party  affiliation,  and  for 
nominations  by  new  parties.  It  made  the  vote  for  the 
candidate  for  secretary  of  state  a  measure  of  party  strength, 
and  introduced  into  the  primary  the  non-fusion  provisions 
of  the  general  election  laws.49  The  first  Tuesday  in  Sep- 
tember became  the  date  of  the  primary  both  for  candidates 
and  for  delegates,  and  accordingly  the  county  and  state 
conventions  were  to  be  held  after  that  date.  The  legis- 
lature in  this  session  passed  ten  local  acts,50  the  most  im- 
portant of  these  amending  the  already  radical  Alpena  act 
so  as  to  make  possible  in  that  county  the  direct  nomination 
of  all  candidates,  including  those  for  school  district  and 
village  offices.51 

Up  to  January,  1909,  direct  primaries  had  been  adopted 
in  the  following  subdivisions:52 


Congressional  districts  .  .  . 

Rep. 
.  .  IO 

Dem. 
I 

Pro. 
2 

Soc. 
I 

Soc.  Lab. 
I 

Senatorial  districts  

.  .  IO 

g 

8 

7 

7 

Representative  districts.  . 
Counties  

..56 

.  58 

16 

17 

9 

9 

9 

47  Detroit  Free  Press,  January  4,  April  24,  1907. 

48  Public  Acts,  Extra  Session,  1907,  No.  4. 

49  See  above,  page  54ff . 

50  Local  Acts,  1907,  Nos.  353,  370,  483,  601,  693,  712,  728,  740,  752, 
754- 

51  Local  Acts,  1907,  No.  754. 
62  House  Journal,  1909,  p.  43. 

5 


66  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [502 

Various  local  acts  were  in  force;  and  in  practice  the 
nominating  system  showed  need  of  simplification,  uni- 
fication, and  additional  safeguards  as  to  the  use  of  money.63 
In  1909,  therefore,  the  legislature  in  a  more  scientific  and 
less  reluctant  spirit  enacted  a  law54  which  repealed  the  law 
of  1907  and  all  contravening  local  laws  and  made  detailed 
and  careful  provision  for  nominations  and  party  organiza- 
tions throughout  the  State.  It  prescribed  that  direct 
nominations  should  apply  without  a  previous  referendum 
vote  to  the  offices  of  governor,  lieutenant-governor,  United 
States  senator,  representative  in  Congress,  representatives 
and  senators  in  the  state  legislature,  and  city  officers  in 
Detroit  and  Grand  Rapids.  The  law  made  a  similar  pro- 
vision with  reference  to  officers  in  all  counties  and  cities 
already  having  direct  nominations,  but  permitted  its  use 
in  other  counties  and  cities  and  in  judicial  circuits  to  be 
optional.  It  abandoned  the  forty  per  cent  provision. 
Finally  it  made  elaborate  provision  for  the  constitution  of 
district  committees  and  contained  stringent  corrupt  practice 
clauses.  This  law,  with  certain  amendments,  is  still  in 
force.  In  the  referendum  elections  of  1910  Saginaw  was 
the  only  county  of  the  thirty-three  voting  that  rejected 
direct  primaries.55 

Legislation  Since  1909. — In  the  session  of  1911  the  legis- 
lature86 changed  the  date  of  the  fall  primary  from  the  first 
Tuesday  after  the  first  Monday  in  September  to  the  last 
Tuesday  in  August,  and  set  the  date  of  the  spring  primary 
for  the  first  Wednesday  in  March.  It  made  mandatory  the 
direct  nomination  of  all  officers  except  city  officers  in  cities 
of  less  than  seventy  thousand,  and  made  possible  the  direct 
nomination  of  school  officers.  It  expressly  provided  that 
independents  should  not  be  enrolled.  It  changed  the  date 
of  the  state  conventions  and  made  some  changes  in  the 
method  of  selecting  committees.  Most  interesting,  how- 
ever, was  the  legislative  attempt  to  encourage  Democrats 

63  Detroit  Free  Press,  January  8,  1909. 

64  Public  Acts,  1909,  No.  281. 

55  Detroit  News,  July  8,  1910;  Michigan  Manual,  1911,  p.  411. 
11  Public  Acts,  1911,  Nos.  169,  279. 


503]  DIRECT   PRIMARY   LEGISLATION  67 

to  vote  in  their  own  primaries  by  providing  that,  if  a  party 
failed  to  poll  in  the  primary  fifteen  per  cent  of  the  party 
vote  for  secretary  of  state  in  the  last  preceding  election, 
none  of  its  candidates  should  be  allowed  places  on  the  official 
ballot.  The  constitutionality  of  this  clause  was  attacked, 
but  was  upheld  by  the  state  supreme  court,  which  declared 
that  the  test  did  "not  destroy  the  right  of  franchise  because 
the  voter  may  write  the  names  on  the  ballot.  It  may 
render  his  voting  less  convenient,  but  it  does  not  destroy 
or  take  away  his  right."  A  dissenting  judge  maintained, 
however,  that  "it  is  not  competent  for  the  legislature  to 
enact  laws  which  seriously  impair  the  right  to  the  elective 
franchise  .  .  .  [and]  the  right  of  all  political  parties  to 
freely  nominate  their  candidates  for  office  is  fundamental."57 
The  clause  providing  for  the  fifteen  per  cent  vote  was  in 
many  respects  ambiguous.  The  attorney-general  held  that 
it  applied  to  city  and  ward  offices  as  well  as  to  state  and 
county  offices,58  but  he  was  in  doubt  whether  the  clause 
meant  that  the  vote  in  the  city  or  county  should  be  con- 
trolling rather  than  that  in  the  State.59  The  clause  was 
unpopular  with  the  Democrats,  at  whom  it  was  aimed,  and 
it  was  repealed  in  the  legislative  session  of  1913. 

Early  in  1912  the  supporters  of  Roosevelt  in  Michigan 
demanded  a  presidential  preference  primary,  and  in 
February  Governor  Osborn,  who  was  one  of  the  "  Roosevelt 
Governors,"  called  an  extra  session  of  the  legislature  to 
enact  the  desired  law.  The  proposal  enlisted  the  active 
support  of  the  Roosevelt  Republicans  and  the  Wilson 
Democrats,  but  it  was  opposed  by  the  conservatives  of  both 
parties  and  by  the  mining  interests  in  the  upper  peninsula 
and  the  representatives  of  the  interests  in  the  lower  penin- 
sula.60 The  opposition,  however,  was  not  to  the  bill  itself 
but  to  the  proposal  to  give  it  immediate  effect.  To  do  this 
required  a  two-thirds  vote,  and  many  of  the  legislators 

57  Brown  v.  Kent  County  Election  Commissioners,  174  Mich.  481 

(1913)- 

58  Report  of  Attorney-General,  1912,  p.  347. 

59  Report  of  Attorney-General,  1913,  pp.  71,  no. 

60  Detroit  News,  March  4,  5,  6,  1912. 


68  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [504 

probably  believed  that  the  action  would  be  unconstitu- 
tional.61 In  any  event  the  opponents  of  Roosevelt  and 
Wilson  were  successful  in  the  legislature.  The  act,  slightly 
amended  in  1915,  provides  that  a  presidential  primary 
election  shall  be  held  on  the  first  Monday  in  April  in 
presidential  years.  Names  of  presidential  candidates  shall 
be  placed  on  the  ballot  on  the  sole  petition  of  at  least  one 
hundred  of  their  party  supporters  in  Michigan.  The  law 
declares  that  the  "candidate  receiving  the  highest  number 
of  votes  in  the  State  at  said  election  shall  be  declared  to  be 
the  candidate  and  the  choice  of  such  political  party  for  this 
State."  No  provision  is  made  in  the  law  for  the  selection 
of  delegates  to  the  national  convention  or  for  their  in- 
struction.62 

To  the  legislature  of  1913  Governor  Ferris  recommended 
the  abandonment  of  party  enrollment,  provision  for  a 
second-choice  column  on  the  primary  ballot,  the  repeal  of 
the  fifteen  per  cent  clause,  and  a  corrupt  practice  act.  The 
Republican  majority  in  the  legislature,  which  was  faction- 
ally  opposed  to  the  men  then  in  control  of  the  Republican 
state  central  committee,  passed  a  law  providing  for  the 
legalization,  composition,  election,  and  organization  of  the 
state  central  committees.63  The  attorney-general,  however, 
held  the  law  to  be  defective  and  it  was  never  applied.64 
This  legislature  also  passed  a  thorough  corrupt  practice 
act,65  and  an  act  for  the  choosing  of  national  committee- 

61  See  testimony  of  Judge  Murfin  before  the  Senate  Committee 
on  Privileges  and  Elections  of  the  62d  Cong.,  2d  sess.,  p.  982). 

61  Public  Acts,  First  Extra  Session,  1912,  No.  9;  1915,  No.  219.  In 
the  first  trial  of  the  law  in  April,  1916,  Henry  Ford  won  the  Republican 
endorsement  for  president  over  Senator  Smith.  The  Republican  state 
convention  later  declared  for  Justice  Hughes.  "The  utter  futility  of 
the  presidential  primary  needs  no  further  demonstration.  It  is  a  use- 
less, expensive  and  undesired  innovation  in  our  political  system" 
(Detroit  Free  Press,  April  5,  1916). 

63  Public  Acts,  1913,  No.  395. 

84  He  held  the  execution  of  the  law  to  be  a  physical  impossibility, 
because  the  county  clerk  is  given  ten  days  to  file  a  return  on  the  names 
and  the  secretary  of  state  twenty  days  to  call  a  meeting  of  the  state 
board  of  canvassers,  while  the  law  directs  that  the  men  elected  to  the 
central  committee  shall  meet  within  ten  days  after  the  primary  (Detroit 
Free  Press,  August  14,  1914). 

65  Public  Acts,  1913,  No.  109. 


505]  DIRECT   PRIMARY  LEGISLATION  69 

men.66  Significant  of  the  trend  of  the  times  was  the  in- 
troduction of  a  bill  for  the  incorporation  of  political  parties.67 
In  amending  the  general  primary  law  the  legislature, 
besides  doing  away  with  the  fifteen  per  cent  clause,  pro- 
vided for  a  substitution  of  the  open  for  the  closed  primary, 
abolished  party  enrollment,  and  provided  for  a  single  ballot 
for  all  parties. 

The  next  legislature,  in  spite  of  the  Democratic  governor's 
veto,  readopted  party  enrollment  in  a  modified  form  with- 
out, however,  returning  to  the  closed  primary.  The  pro- 
vision is  as  follows:  "When  a  duly  registered  and  qualified 
voter  shall  ask  for  a  ballot  as  before  provided,  the  inspector 
shall  enter  his  name  upon  the  list  together  with  the  name 
of  the  party  the  ballot  of  which  is  requested,  and  the  number 
of  the  ballot  given  to  the  voter."68  The  law  as  it  now  stands 
does  not  prevent  a  Democrat  from  voting  in  a  Republican 
primary  or  vice  versa,  but  it  affords  a  public  record  of  all  so 
voting.  The  law  makes  enrollment  an  accompaniment  of 
voting  rather  than  a  prerequisite  and  qualification  for 
voting. 

Corrupt  Practice  Legislation. — The  local  acts  of  1901 
prohibited  electioneering  at  the  polling  place  or  within  one 
hundred  feet  thereof,  drinking  or  treating  in  the  polling 
place,  repeating,  and  the  soliciting,  receiving,  or  offering 
of  a  bribe  of  money,  or  the  promise  of  money,  place,  or 
position  in  exchange  for  votes.  With  some  minor  changes, 
elaborations,  and  specifications  these  prohibitions  have 
been  repeated  in  all  subsequent  direct  primary  legislation. 
The  public  act  of  1907  in  addition  made  it  unlawful  for  a 
state  officer  to  circulate  petitions  for  any  one  but  himself  or 
to  solicit  votes  for  any  candidate  for  governor,  lieutenant- 
governor,  or  United  States  senator.  This  act  also  provided 
that  saloons  should  be  closed  on  primary  election  days. 

The  act  of  1909  enumerated  in  great  detail  corrupt  prac- 
tices in  primary  elections.  Besides  penalizing  the  various 
forms  of  direct  and  indirect  bribery,  repeating,  treating, 

66  Public  Acts,  1913,  No.  392. 

67  Detroit  News,  February  21,  1913. 

68  Public  Acts,  1915,  No.  313. 


7O  PARTY   ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN  [506 

and  electioneering  in  or  near  the  polls,  the  law  prohibited 
payment  in  any  manner  for  "any  campaign  work,  elec- 
tioneering, [or]  soliciting  votes,  ...  it  being  the  intent  of 
this  clause  to  prohibit  the  prevailing  practice  of  candidates 
hiring  with  money  and  promises  of  positions,  etc.,  workers 
on  primary  day  and  prior  thereto."69  The  law  prohibited 
the  public  posting  by  any  candidate  for  nomination  of  "any 
campaign  card,  banner,  hand  bill,  poster,  lithograph,  half- 
tone engraving,  photograph  or  other  likeness  of  himself,  or 
other  advertising  matter  used"  for  the  advancement  of  his 
candidacy.70  The  law  specified  that  campaign  cards  or 
other  advertising  matter  except  postal  cards  and  letters 
must  not  be  larger  than  two  and  one  fourth  inches  in  width 
by  four  inches  in  length,  and  that  this  advertising  matter 
should  contain  no  likeness  of  the  candidate  larger  than  one 
and  one  half  inches  in  width  by  two  inches  in  height. 
Campaign  advertising  is  absolutely  prohibited  "in  or  upon 
any  magazine,  program,  bill  of  fare,  ticket  for  any  ball  or 
other  entertainment,  or  upon  or  in  any  other  substance  or 
publication  whatsoever,  except  in  a  daily,  weekly,  or 
monthly  newspaper  which  has  been  regularly  and  bona  fide 
published  and  circulated  for  at  least  three  months  before 
such  advertisement  is  to  be  inserted  therein."  The  act 
provided  that  the  type  used  in  the  body  of  political  adver- 
tising should  not  be  larger  than  that  used  in  the  editorial 
section  of  the  paper,  and  that  charges  for  political  adver- 
tising should  not  be  higher  than  for  non-political.71 

The  corrupt  practice  act  of  1913, 72  without  repealing  the 
provisions  just  noted,  added  a  number  of  detailed  regu- 
lations as  to  the  use  of  money  in  primary  campaigns.  The 
law  limits  primary  campaign  expenses  to  twenty-five  per 
cent  of  one  year's  compensation.  Candidates  for  governor 
and  lieutenant-governor,  however,  may  spend  a  sum  not  to 
exceed  fifty  per  cent  of  one  year's  salary.  No  candidate  is 
to  be  restricted  to  an  expenditure  less  than  one  hundred 

69  Public  Acts,  1909,  No.  381. 

70  Ibid. 

71  Ibid. 

72  Public  Acts,  1913,  No.  109. 


507]  DIRECT   PRIMARY  LEGISLATION  71 

dollars.  Expenditures  are  permitted  only  for  certain  speci- 
fied purposes.73 

To  aid  in  the  enforcement  of  these  provisions  as  to  ex- 
penditure the  law  provides  that,  within  ten  days  after  the 
primary  election,  every  candidate  shall  file  with  the  county 
clerk  of  the  county  in  which  he  resides  a  detailed  statement, 
sworn  to  before  a  notary,  setting  forth  each  item  of  con- 
tribution and  expenditure,  the  date  of  each  receipt,  the 
names  of  persons  from  whom  money  was  received  or  to 
whom  it  was  disbursed,  and  the  objects  of  expenditures, 
together  with  a  statement  of  unpaid  debts  and  obligations. 
The  law  provides  that  these  statements  shall  be  open  to 
public  inspection,  and  that  failure  to  file  shall  disqualify 
for  the  holding  of  the  office  to  which  the  candidate  has  been 
elected  and  shall  render  him  liable  to  criminal  prosecution. 

As  to  contributions,  the  law  makes  provision  for  publicity 
as  above  stated  and  also  imposes  restrictions  on  contribu- 
tions. No  one  not  a  candidate  or  a  member  of  a  political 
committeee  is  authorized  to  accept  a  contribution  for 
campaign  expenses.  Contributions  are  to  be  given  and 
entered  in  the  accounts  only  in  the  name  of  the  person  by 
whom  the  contributions  were  actually  furnished.  No 
candidate  is  permitted  to  disburse  money  received  from  an 
anonymous  source.  Contributions  from  any  one  acting  for 
a  corporation  are  prohibited. 

The  law  seeks  also  to  prohibit  the  intimidation  of  em- 
ployees by  their  employers.  It  is  unlawful  for  employers  to 
enclose  in  pay  envelopes  any  political  notices  containing 
threats,  expressed  or  implied,  intending  to  influence  the 
political  opinions  of  the  employees,  and  to  post  in  any 
factory  or  place  of  business  within  ninety  days  of  any  elec- 
tion or  primary  any  placards  containing  a  threat  or  notice 
that  in  case  a  certain  ticket  or  candidate  shall  be  nominated 
or  elected  work  will  cease,  the  establishment  be  closed,  or 
the  wages  reduced. 

The  law  requires  that  political  advertisements  in  news- 
papers shall  be  marked  paid,  and  prohibits  the  giving  or 

73  See  below,  page  144. 


72  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [508 

receiving  of  payment  for  editorial  support.  Finally  the 
law  penalizes  the  making  of  false  statements  reflecting  on  a 
candidate's  character,  and  prohibits  the  soliciting  of  dona- 
tions from  candidates  by  religious,  charitable,  or  other 
organizations.  The  penalties  provided  by  the  law  are 
adequate:  a  maximum  fine  of  one  thousand  dollars  or  a 
maximum  imprisonment  of  two  years,  or  both.  On  the 
whole,  the  corrupt  practice  laws  of  Michigan  seem  now  fairly 
complete  and  effective.  Although  the  political  assessment 
of  office-holders  is  not  expressly  prohibited,  the  provisions 
in  regard  to  bribery  might  be  construed  to  prohibit  such 
contributions. 

Corrupt  practice  legislation  is  a  comparatively  recent 
development  in  Michigan.  Prior  to  1909  the  provisions 
were  few  and  did  not  reach  the  real  evils.  Appearing  at  the 
end  of  twelve  years  of  experimentation  with  direct  primaries, 
the  detailed  law  of  1913  seems  to  show  an  appreciation  of 
the  inadequacy  of  mere  machinery  to  produce  good  nomi- 
nations, and  also  a  realization  of  the  power  of  those  financial 
influences  which,  having  perverted  and  discredited  the 
convention  system  of  nomination,  seemed  about  to  do  the 
same  with  the  direct  primary  system. 

Summary. — Since  1900  the  Michigan  legislature  has 
passed  more  than  thirty  acts,  original  and  amendatory, 
having  to  do  with  direct  nominations.  From  1901  to  1905 
the  legislation  was  entirely  local;  from  1905  to  1909  it  was 
both  local  and  general  but  optional  with  the  parties  and 
with  the  localities;  since  1909  it  has  been  general  and 
mandatory. 

Legislation  has  been  halting  and  half-hearted.  The 
history  of  it  illustrates  the  strength,  the  slowness,  and  the 
sureness  of  the  action  of  well-defined  public  opinion,  stim- 
ulated by  newspapers,  on  a  reluctant  legislature  which 
has  been  usually  dominated,  at  least  in  respect  to  this 
legislation,  by  leaders  who  were  hostile  to  any  legislative 
interference  with  their  organization  activities.  Among  the 
influences  which  led  to  the  formation  of  this  public  opinion 
none  was  stronger  than  the  evidence  of  the  selfish  control 


509]  DIRECT   PRIMARY  LEGISLATION  73 

of  the  convention  system  by  men  of  wealth  and  by  cor- 
porations. It  was  not  so  much  that  the  convention  system 
worked  badly;  for  it  had  long  worked  badly.  But  it  now 
became  apparently  an  effective  instrument  for  an  undemo- 
cratic and  sinister  domination,  and  the  struggle  between  the 
forces  which  sought  to  control  it  developed  into  a  public 
scandal.  The  best  politicians  and  thinking  people  in 
general  were  not  dissatisfied  with  conventions  per  se;  but 
they  felt  that,  as  a  means  of  popular  expression,  the  con- 
vention had  become  incoherent  and  ineffectual,  that  it  had 
been  perverted  from  its  true  ends,  and  that  it  had  become 
subject  to  influences  which  were  antagonistic  to  the  public 
welfare.  It  has  been  charged  that  the  public  demand  for 
direct  primaries  was  originally  a  newspaper  demand,  ad- 
vanced largely  through  motives  of  self-interest.  The  news- 
papers naturally  had  much  to  do  with  creating  public 
opinion  on  the  subject,  but  how  far  they  were  disinterested 
it  is  impossible  to  say. 

The  movement  for  direct  nominations  started  within  the 
majority  party.  After  the  beginning  of  the  movement, 
strong  Democratic  endorsements  seem  to  have  had  slight 
effect  on  the  course  of  events.  Democratic  influence  in 
the  legislature  was  practically  nil;  and  in  the  legislature  of 
1905,  which  passed  the  first  general  law,  there  was  not  a 
single  Democratic  member.  In  the  course  of  debates  and 
newspaper  discussions  laws  of  other  States  were  occasion- 
ally cited,  and  among  these  the  Minnesota  law  was  most 
frequently  mentioned. 

Michigan's  direct  primary  legislation,  as  it  now  stands,  is 
still  far  from  finality.  The  most  thoughtful  politicians  are 
not  satisfied  with  it.  They  say  that  it  occupies  a  half-way 
position  and  must  either  return  to  the  old  system  or  advance 
to  a  more  simple  and  effective  means  of  popular  expression. 
In  the  past  the  various  laws  have  been  experiments;  and 
they  have  been  experiments  undertaken  by  a  party  which 
as  represented  by  its  managers  has  not  at  heart  believed  in 
the  principle  underlying  the  laws.  The  direct  primary 
acts  have  been  not  only  experiments;  they  have  also  been 


74  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [510 

sops.  This  legislation  has  exhibited  a  hesitancy  out  of  all 
proportion  to  any  danger  that  might  result  from  it,  and 
some  of  it  has  revealed  downright  insincerity. 

Not  only  has  lawmaking  been  affected  by  the  desire  to 
save  as  much  as  possible  of  the  old  system,  but  the  party 
managers,  trained  in  the  methods  of  the  old  system,  have 
participated  in  the  drafting  of  the  new  laws.  The  Repub- 
lican state  central  committee,  or  chiefly  its  chairman  and 
secretary,  played  an  important,  perhaps  a  decisive,  part  in 
the  enactment  of  primary  laws  and  especially  the  law  of 
1905. 74  In  1915  the  Republican  state  central  committee 
appointed  a  subcommittee  on  revision  of  the  primary  law. 
The  report  of  this  subcommitteee  was  adopted  in  full75  and 
presented  to  the  legislature  in  the  form  of  a  petition;  but, 
owing  partly  to  temporary  political  exigencies,76  it  was  not 
enacted  into  law.  The  influence  of  party  managers  on 
legislation  has  probably  been  greater  in  this  field  than  in 
any  other.  It  has  been  constant,  active,  and  sometimes 
very  direct  and  effective.  Not  always  reactionary,  it  has 
been,  nevertheless,  generally  unscientific  and  opportunistic. 

Opportunism  has  marked  the  course  of  direct  primary 
legislation.  Its  early  defeats  in  the  legislature  were  partly 
occasioned  by  factional  antagonisms  growing  out  of  the 
personality  and  the  policies  of  Governor  Pingree.  The 
forty  per  cent  clause  in  the  law  of  1905  was  probably  de- 
signed to  protect  the  machine  candidate  for  governor  in 
1906.  The  presidential  primary  bill  of  1912,  the  act  for 
the  election  of  state  central  committees  in  1913,  and  the 
revision  of  the  general  law  in  1915  were  all  influenced  more 
or  less  by  Republican  factional  fights. 

The  legislation  shows  many  defects  and  inconsistencies. 
Difficult  to  explain  are  certain  differences  in  the  acts  passed 
for  Wayne  and  Kent  counties  in  1903.  The  Wayne  act 
provided  for  a  single  ballot,  the  Kent  act  for  separate  ballots. 
In  Kent  independent  candidates  could  be  nominated;  in 
Wayne  there  was  no  method  provided  for  their  nomination. 

74  Detroit  Tribune,  February  17,  May  29,  1903,  April  6,  24,  27,  1905. 

75  Detroit  Free  Press,  December  30,  1914. 

76  A  factional  fight  in  Detroit. 


5Il]  DIRECT   PRIMARY  LEGISLATION  75 

In  Wayne,  township  officers  might  be  nominated  directly; 
in  Kent  they  could  not  be.  In  the  latter  county  the  candi- 
dates selected  the  party  committees;  in  the  former,  they 
did  not. 

The  opinions  rendered  by  the  attorney-general  reveal 
numerous  shortcomings  and  ambiguities  in  the  laws.  For 
example,  in  the  law  of  1909  there  was  no  provision  for  the 
filling  of  vacancies  among  nominees  for  the  legislature.77 
In  1910,  where  the  county  commissioner  of  schools  was 
elected  in  the  fall,  direct  primaries  applied  to  his  office; 
where  he  was  elected  in  the  spring  they  did  not  apply.78 
Circuit  judges  are  nominated  in  the  direct  primaries;  supreme 
court  judges  are  not.  The  history  of  direct  primaries  in 
Kent  County  is  a  record  of  legislative  blundering.  The 
law  of  1901  applied  only  to  the  city  of  Grand  Rapids;  the 
law  of  1903  applied  to  the  whole  county;  from  1905  to  1909 
there  were  two  laws  applying  to  the  county.  On  account 
of  overlapping  local  and  general  acts  the  city  of  Grand 
Rapids  had  a  congressional  primary  on  September  4,  1906, 
and  a  county  primary  just  a  week  later.79  Since  the  legisla- 
ture, in  the  amending  act  of  1907,  absentmindedly  omitted 
to  reenact  the  provision  for  the  direct  nomination  of  city 
officers,  the  city  of  Grand  Rapids,  which  was  the  first  to 
have  direct  primaries,  had  to  nominate  in  1908  under  the 
old  system.80  At  the  present  time,  when  the  principle  of 
direct  nomination  has  been  finally  accepted,  all  state  officers 
elected  in  the  spring,  including  supreme  court  judges  and 
regents  of  the  University,  all  elective  state  administrative 
officers  except  governor  and  lieutenant-governor,  and  all 
township  and  village  officers81  are  still  nominated  by  the  old 
method, — a  method  which  is  also  used  in  its  entirety  for 
the  selection  of  delegates  to  national  conventions,82  and  in 
a  modified  form  for  the  drafting  of  party  platforms. 

77  Report  of  Attorney-General,  1911,  p.  193. 

78  Report  of  Attorney-General,  1911,  p.  73. 

79  Report  of  Attorney-General,  1906,  p.  99. 

80  Ellis  v.  Boer,  150  Mich.  453  (December,  1907) ;  Dykstra  v.  Holden, 
151  Mich.  293  (1908). 

81  Report  of  Attorney-General,  1910,  pp.  167,  191. 

82  Report  of  Attorney-General,  1908,  p.  165. 


76  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [512 

Besides  the  general  retention  of  the  delegate  conventions 
of  the  old  regime,  Michigan,  as  a  matter  of  party  politics 
rather  than  of  principle,  adhered  up  to  1909  pretty  faithfully 
to  the  doctrine  that  the  adoption  of  direct  nominations 
should  be  subject  to  local  and  party  option.  In  practice 
the  doctrine  proved  of  little  value,  as  the  people  were  over- 
whelmingly in  favor  of  direct  nominations.  The  State  has 
experimented  with  party  enrollment,  the  forty  per  cent 
provision,  the  fifteen  per  cent  provision,  the  second  election, 
and  the  blanket  ballot,  and  has  either  partially  or  wholly 
abandoned  them;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  has  shown  little 
inclination  to  try  the  preferential  vote.83 

Throughout  this  legislation  at  least  one  consistent  prin- 
ciple has  been  maintained:  that  the  conduct  of  direct 
primary  elections  should  be  removed  from  the  control  of 
the  party  organizations.  Yet,  in  legal  theory,  the  direct 
primary  is  a  party,  not  a  public  affair.  Said  the  state 
supreme  court  in  1908 :  "A  primary  election  is  not  an  election 
to  public  office.  It  is  merely  the  selection  of  candidates  for 
office  by  the  members  of  a  political  party  in  a  manner  having 
the  form  of  an  election."84  Accordingly,  when  the  direct 
primaries  fail  to  nominate  or  when  a  vacancy  occurs  in  the 
party  ticket,  the  appropriate  party  committee  is  uniformly 
empowered  by  the  primary  laws  to  fill  the  vacancy.  The 
direct  primary  is  a  method  of  nomination,  not  of  election. 

83  It  was  recommended,  however,  by  Governor  Ferris  in  1913  (House 
Journal,  1913,  pp.  27-29).    The  above  discussion  does  not  take    into 
account  recommendations  and  enactments  during  the  legislative  session 
of  1917. 

84  Line  v.  Board  of  Election  Canvassers,  154  Mich.  331  (1908). 


CHAPTER  IV 
THE  COMMITTEE  SYSTEM  UNDER  DIRECT  PRIMARIES 

The  regulation  of  party  committees  has  been  a  subordinate 
consideration  in  direct  primary  legislation,  but  legislation 
has  affected  these  committees  directly  and  indirectly. 

Ward  and  Township  Committees. — With  the  passing  of 
most  of  the  old  committee-controlled  primaries,  the  ward 
and  the  township  committees  lost  much  of  their  importance 
in  the  nominating  process,  and  their  regulation  by  law  has 
been  unnecessary.  The  only  acts  making  provision  for  the 
selection  of  ward  and  township  committees  are  those  relating 
to  Wayne  County.  The  number  of  committeemen  is  still 
determined  by  party  usage,  but  the  term  of  office  is  legally 
fixed  at  two  years.1 

County  and  City  Committees. — For  the  election  and  or- 
ganization of  other  local  committees  the  legislature  has 
made  greater  provision  and  has  tried  various  methods.  The 
first  direct  primary  act — that  for  Grand  Rapids  in  1901 — 
provided  that  the  candidates  nominated  for  city  and  district 
offices  should  name  the  chairmen  and  the  secretaries  of  their 
respective  committees.  The  Kent  and  Muskegon  acts  of 
1903  provided  that  the  candidates  should  name  the  county 
committees  and  the  county  chairmen  and  that  the  com- 
mittees should  name  the  secretaries.  The  Alpena  acts  of 
1905  and  1907  prescribed  that  the  city  and  county  com- 
mittees and  their  chairmen  should  be  elected  in  the  direct 
primary,  that  the  chairman  of  the  city  committee  should  be 
vice-chairman  of  the  county  committee,  and  that  each 
committee  should  choose  its  own  secretary  and  treasurer. 
The  Wayne  acts  of  1903  and  1905  provided  for  the  election 
of  county  and  city  committees.  The  stipulations  of  the 

1  Public  Acts,  1913,  No.  91. 

77 


78  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [514 

general  act  of  1909,  which  as  amended  in  1911  are  still  in 
force,  are  that  the  county  committee  shall  be  chosen  by  the 
county  convention,  and  that  the  candidates  for  county 
offices  shall  name  the  chairman  and  the  secretary  of  the 
committee.2  The  term  of  the  county  committeemen  is 
legally  fixed  at  two  years.  There  are  at  present  no  pro- 
visions in  the  general  laws  for  the  election  of  city  committees. 

District  Committees. — Up  to  1909  the  only  legal  provision 
for  the  appointment  of  district  committees  was  found  in  the 
above-mentioned  local  acts,  which  in  general  adopted  the 
same  method  for  district  as  for  county  and  city  committees. 
Since  1909  these  committees  may  be  chosen  in  two  ways: 
(i)  they  may  be  appointed  by  the  candidate,  or  (2)  in  the 
absence  of  such  appointment,  they  may  be  composed  of  the 
county  committeemen  residing  in  the  district.  In  the  case 
of  districts  comprising  more  than  one  county  the  county 
committeemen  residing  in  the  counties  or  parts  of  counties 
are  empowered  to  choose  the  district  committee.  In 
practice  the  candidate  has  generally  selected  his  committee, 
although  his  private  secretary  usually  acts  as  chairman  or 
secretary  of  the  committee  and  takes  charge  of  the  cam- 
paign. In  1911  the  above  provisions  applying  to  district 
committees  were  extended  to  judicial  circuit  committees. 

Functions  of  the  Committees. — These  provisions  for  the 
naming  of  the  local  party  officials  are  a  logical  result  of  the 
design  and  tendency  of  the  direct  primary  to  transfer  the 
center  of  power  in  the  party  organization  from  the  party 
managers  to  the  candidates.  Under  the  old  system  the 
convention  delegates  were  formally  and  theoretically  closer 
to  the  people  than  were  the  candidates,  and  were  therefore 
the  logical  men  to  choose  the  party  officials.  Under  the 
new  system  the  candidate  himself  is  directly  commissioned 
by  the  electorate.  The  direct  primary  laws  have  in  theory 
reversed  the  relation  in  local  politics  of  the  candidate  and 
the  party  manager.  What  is  true  in  theory,  however,  is 
only  partly  true  in  practice.  In  the  districts  the  committee 

1  There  is  no  provision  for  filling  vacancies  in  these  offices  (Report  of 
Attorney-General,  1914,  p.  745). 


515]      COMMITTEE   SYSTEM   UNDER  DIRECT   PRIMARIES          79 

is  largely  honorary,  and  its  officers,  directly  responsible  to 
the  candidate,  are  rather  in  the  position  of  friends  or  em- 
ployees than  of  managers.  But  this,  as  we  have  seen,  was 
generally  the  case  in  the  districts  under  the  convention 
system.  There  has  been,  apparently,  no  great  change.  In 
the  counties  the  situation  is  somewhat  different,  owing  to 
the  fact  that  there  are  several  candidates  instead  of  one 
and  the  county  committee  still  has  in  connection  with  the 
county  conventions  some  duties  apart  from  campaign 
management. 

Under  the  old  system  the  county  committee  called  con- 
ventions and  primaries,  attended  to  the  preliminaries  of 
conventions,  and  certified  delegates  to  other  conventions 
and  candidates  to  the  election  commissioners.  In  exercising 
these  functions  the  committee  was  doing  its  fundamental 
duty,  that  of  keeping  the  party  organization  alive  in  the 
county.  The  direct  primary  has  shorn  the  committee  of 
these  formal  functions.  The  biennial  resuscitation  of  the 
party  is  now  performed  by  the  law.  Nevertheless,  if  can- 
didates do  not  file  petitions  for  the  primary,  the  organization 
may  lapse.  Accordingly  the  committee  is  finding  some  new 
functions,  and  some  old  ones  enlarged.  We  have  seen  that 
under  the  convention  system  the  county  committee  had 
much  to  do  with  the  slating  of  nominations  prior  to  the 
convention.  Where  there  are  brisk  contests  the  county 
committee  at  present  has  probably  a  diminished  power 
over  nominations;  but  when  political  conditions  are  apa- 
thetic and  nominations  are  not  eagerly  sought,  county  com- 
mittees have  circulated  petitions  for  candidates  and, 
whenever  and  wherever  the  procedure  has  been  legally 
possible,  have  in  informal  conferences  agreed  upon  certain 
candidates  to  be  written  in  on  the  ballots.3  One  Repub- 

3  Detroit  News,  July  21,  1912,  August  21,  1914;  Kalamazoo  Gazette- 
Telegraph,  June  29,  July  27,  1916;  Detroit  Free  Press,  August  i,  1916. 
Delegates  to  county  conventions  are  supposed  to  be  elected  in  the  pri- 
mary. The  following  quotation  throws  light  on  how  the  "people"  do 
it:  "A  mass- meeting  of  the  Republicans  of  Marshall  was  held  last 
evening  at  the  office  of  C.  C.  Cortright,  and  delegates  were  selected  to 
guide  the  voter  in  casting  his  ballot  for  delegates  to  the  county  conven- 
tion, Sept.  ii.  ...  Only  two  were  present  from  the  first  ward 


80  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [516 

lican  county  chairman  informs  me  that  in  1912  and  1914 
the  committee  had  found  it  difficult  to  induce  men  to  run 
for  office  and  "had  to  hustle  around  and  file  petitions  for 
them."  This  has  been  done,  however,  more  by  Democrats 
than  by  Republicans;  for  where  there  is  a  good  chance  of 
election,  as  appeared  to  be  the  case  in  1916,  candidates  are 
willing  to  circulate  their  own  petitions  and  are  sometimes 
embarrassingly  numerous. 

In  strong  Republican  counties  the  Democratic  committee- 
men  have  to  bestir  themselves  and  take  the  initiative  or 
they  are  likely  to  have  no  candidates  at  all.  In  some 
counties  both  Republican  and  Democratic  committees  meet 
prior  to  the  primary,  pick  out  candidates,  and  circulate 
petitions  for  them.  When  the  committee  does  not  actually 
circulate  petitions,  it  in  many  cases  attempts  to  influence 
strong  men  to  enter  and  weak  ones  to  withdraw.  The  com- 
mittee usually  tries  to  arrange  an  equitable  distribution  of 
nominations  among  the  different  townships  and  cities  in  the 
county.  This  practice — which  appears  to  be  on  the  in- 
crease— of  leaving  the  circulation  of  petitions  to  the  county 
committee  or  to  other  party  leaders  and  of  obviating  con- 
tests by  conferences  and  understandings  prior  to  the 
primary,  may  make  the  direct  primary  a  practical  nullity. 
It  means  that  nominations  which  were  formerly  made  in 
public  conventions  are  now  often  made  in  secret  con- 
ferences. 

It  seems  to  be  generally  agreed  that  the  appointment  of 
the  officers  of  the  committee  by  the  candidates,  as  far  as  the 
local  candidates  are  concerned,  has  worked  well.  On 
account  of  the  number  of  county  candidates,  all  of  whom 
participate  in  the  selection  of  the  officers,  the  latter  are 
likely  to  be  real  leaders  and  managers  rather  than  sub- 
ordinates and  assistants,  harmonizing  differences  among  the 
candidates  and  acting  as  a  unifying  factor  in  the  campaign. 
In  presidential  years,  however,  the  appointment  of  the 

and  one  each  from  the  third  and  fourth,  but  the  second,  as  usual,  was 
well  represented,  and  more  were  present  than  enough  to  fill  the  ward's 
quota  of  delegates"  (Moon-Journal  [Battle  Creek],  August  24,  1916). 
See  also  ibid.,  August  18,  23,  25,  1916. 


517]       COMMITTEE   SYSTEM   UNDER  DIRECT   PRIMARIES          8 1 

county  chairmen  takes  place  at  least  six  weeks  too  late. 
The  county  chairmen  who  are  in  office  in  July  are  disin- 
clined to  organize  their  counties  for  the  presidential  contest 
because  in  September  new  chairmen  will  be  appointed.  To 
supply  an  effective  local  organization  the  Republican  party 
in  1916  organized  a  strong  "Hughes-for- President"  club 
in  every  county  to  assume  the  management  of  the  cam- 
paign. In  the  county  committees  as  a  whole  there  appear 
to  be  less  activity  and  interest  than  formerly.  County 
chairmen  complain  that  it  is  hard  to  get  the  committees 
together.  The  spirit  of  the  free  lance,  which  has  infected 
candidates,  has  apparently  touched  the  committeemen. 
They  feel  less  strongly  their  responsibility  to  the  organiza- 
tion and  entertain  little  fear  of  its  powers  of  discipline.  In 
personnel  the  committees  have  improved,  the  Democratic 
committees  especially  being  stronger  than  they  were  a 
decade  ago.  What  is  true  of  the  State  as  a  whole,  however, 
does  not  appear  to  be  true  of  Wayne  County,  for  in  that 
county,  owing  to  circumstances  which  I  shall  mention  later, 
the  committees  have  deteriorated  in  personnel  and  in- 
fluence. A  prominent  Detroit  Republican  expressed  him- 
self to  me  about  as  follows:  "Candidates  have  no  confidence 
in  the  county  committee,  for  the  committeemen  are  all 
grafters.  They  are  there  simply  to  get  money  from  the 
candidates  and  put  it  in  their  own  pockets."4 

The  new  functions  imposed  on  the  county  committees 
by  the  direct  primary  laws  are  of  a  more  or  less  routine 
nature  and  not  generally  important.  Such  is  the  duty  of 
apportioning  delegates  to  county  delegate  conventions.  If 
there  is  a  vacancy  from  any  cause  after  the  selection  of  a 
candidate,  or  if  there  is  no  selection  at  the  primary  election, 
the  county  committee  may  fill  the  vacancy;  but  it  may  not 
name  the  candidate  when  there  has  simply  been  a  failure 
to  file  nomination  petitions.6 

The  State  Central  Committees. — A  law  providing  for  the 

4  In  fairness  to  the  committee,  however,  it  might  be  said  that  the 
man  expressing  the  opinion  was  in  factional  opposition  to  the  committee. 
6  Report  of  Attorney-General,  1911,  p.  69. 
6 


82  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [518 

direct  election  and  organization  of  the  state  central  com- 
mittees was  enacted  in  1913,  but  on  account  of  an  opinion 
of  the  attorney-general  it  did  not  go  into  effect.6  The 
legislature  of  1915  enacted  a  law  which  legalized  the  method 
of  selection  by  state  conventions.  The  committee  is  to  be 
selected  at  the  first  state  convention  in  the  odd  years,  and 
is  to  consist  of  a  chairman  and  two  members  from  each 
congressional  district,  the  latter  to  be  nominated  by  the 
district  delegates  to  the  state  convention.  The  committee 
shall  select  its  secretary  and  treasurer  and  fill  its  own 
vacancies.7  In  1908  the  Michigan  Republican  Editorial 
Association  requested  that  it  have  two  members  at  large 
on  the  Republican  state  central  committee.  The  committee 
thereupon  recommended  that  its  membership  be  increased 
by  two  members  to  be  nominated  by  the  association  and 
elected  by  the  state  convention,  and  this  plan  was  adopted 
by  the  state  convention  without  opposition.8  The  Re- 
publican state  convention  in  1914  voted  to  increase  the 
membership  of  the  committee  by  the  election  of  two  addi- 
tional members  at  large.  The  two  elected  were  from 
Detroit  and  Grand  Rapids.  The  membership  of  the  com- 
mittee is  now  thirty.9  In  the  constitution  of  the  Demo- 
cratic state  committee  there  has  been  no  change.  It  has 
twenty-six  members. 

In  the  Republican  state  committee  the  same  men  held  the 

6  This  law  (Public  Acts,  1913,  No.  395)  provided  that  each  political 
party  should  have  a  state  central  committee  consisting  of  two  members 
from  each  congressional  district,  a  chairman,  and  a  secretary.     The 
district  members  should  be  selected  in  the  August  primary  in  the  same 
manner  as  is  provided  by  law  for  the  nomination  of  candidates  for 
representatives  in  Congress;  the  state  central  committee  so  chosen 
should  elect  its  own  chairman  and  secretary,  and  members  of  the  com- 
mittee should  hold  office  for  two  years  and  should  fill  all  vacancies  in 
their  number.     The  Republican  state  convention  in  the  spring  of  1913 
adopted  this  plank:    "We  believe  in  a  changed  method  of  selecting 
political  state  central  committees  and  national  committeemen;  to  the 
end  that  party  managers  shall  be  brought  closer  to  the  rank  and  file 
of  the  party  membership"  (Detroit  News,  February  12,  1913).     See 
above,  page  68,  and  note. 

7  Public  Acts,  1915,  No.  231. 

8  Detroit  Free  Press,  May   12,   13,   1908;  Grand  Rapids  Herald, 
February  15,  1907,  May  13,  1908. 

9  Detroit  News,  October  I,  1914. 


519]      COMMITTEE   SYSTEM   UNDER  DIRECT   PRIMARIES          83 

offices  of  chairman  and  secretary  from  1900  to  1910. 10 
With  the  nomination  of  Osborn  in  1910,  his  personal  selec- 
tion, W.  F.  Knox,  became  head  of  the  committee,  the  first 
upper-peninsula  man  to  act  in  that  capacity.  Paul  H.  King 
became  secretary.  In  1912  the  Taft  men  controlled  the 
state  convention,  and  A.  J.  Groesbeck,  a  Detroit  lawyer, 
was  chosen  chairman  and  Charles  S.  Pierce  secretary.11  In 
1914  when  Osborn  again  obtained  the  nomination,  this 
time  over  Groesbeck  himself,  the  latter  resigned  the  chair- 
manship and  was  succeeded  by  Gilman  M.  Dame,  Osborn's 
close  friend  and  primary  campaign  manager,  and  D.  E. 
Alward  again  became  secretary.  Without  legal  enactment, 
therefore,  the  tendency  in  the  Republican  party  seems  to 
have  been  for  the  candidate  for  governor  to  name  either  the 
chairman  or  the  secretary  of  the  state  committee;  and  this 
tendency,  although  it  existed  under  the  convention  system, 
has  been  much  stronger  under  direct  nominations.12 

During  the  primary  campaign  the  candidate  for  governor 
puts  his  interests  in  the  hands  of  a  manager,  who  improvises 
an  organization  and  for  several  months  makes  a  careful 
study  of  the  attitude  of  the  public  and  of  men  of  influence 
toward  his  candidate.  It  is  natural  that  the  candidate 
after  his  nomination  should  wish  to  retain  in  his  service  a 
man  of  experience  and  of  proved  loyalty.  It  would  seem 
that  the  party  could  have  no  serious  objections  to  the 
appointment  of  such  a  man,  for  its  first  interest  lies  in  the 
efficient  conduct  of  the  campaign  and  in  the  election  of  its 
candidate  for  governor.  But  objections  come  from  those 
who  distrust  any  plan  which  appears  to  make  the  candidate 
independent  of  the  organization  and  therefore  to  weaken  the 

10  G.  J.  Diekema,  chairman,  and  D.  E.  Alward,  secretary. 

11  According  to  a  newspaper  report  of  the  state  central  committee 
meeting  in  1912,  Mr.  Musselman,  the  nominee  for  governor,  wanted 
the  committee  to  appoint   his   primary  campaign   manager,    Major 
Loomis,  secretary;  but  the  committee,  to  secure  harmony,  selected  a 
representative  of  the  defeated  candidate.     Precedent  was  urged  by 
some  as  an  argument  for  the  appointment  of  Loomis  (Detroit  Free 
Press,  August  31,  1912). 

12  Under  the  new  law  the  first  Republican  state  convention  in  1916 
elected  John  D.  Mangum  of  Marquette  chairman,  and  reelected  Alward 
secretary. 


84  PARTY   ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN  [520 

organization.  On  the  other  hand,  as  happened  in  1912, 
when  the  primary  campaign  has  engendered  strong  factional 
feeling  there  may  be  an  inclination  to  give  the  defeated 
faction,  in  order  to  unify  the  party,  a  hand  in  the  manage- 
ment of  the  campaign.  In  the  Democratic  party  there  has 
been  no  occasion  for  the  appearance  of  this  problem,  for 
there  have  been  no  contests  for  the  gubernatorial  nomina- 
tion. Since  1904  the  minority  party  has  had  four  different 
chairmen  and  one  secretary.13 

In  1910  the  Republican  state  committee  had  a  field 
secretary  who  was  also  manager  of  the  speakers'  bureau.14 
Since  1904  the  membership  of  executive  committees  has 
varied  from  five  to  nine.  Since  1904  five  men  have  served 
as  Republican  treasurer.  They  have  been  wealthy  and, 
except  since  1914,  residents  of  Detroit.15  The  Democratic 
treasurers  have  been  more  constant.  Since  1904  there  have 
been  two,  and  one  of  these  has  served  since  1908. 16 

After  1904  Detroit  in  appearance  lost  its  preeminence  in 
the  officialdom  of  the  party  organizations,  only  one  chair- 
man since  that  date  residing  in  the  city;  but  at  the  present 
time17  the  two  national  committeemen  are  Detroit  men  and 
the  city  is  apparently  regaining,  especially  in  the  Democratic 
party,  a  position  corresponding  to  its  voting  power.  The 
reason  for  its  lack  of  influence  may  be  found  in  the  fact  that 
the  gubernatorial  candidate  has  usually  named  the  state 
chairman,  and  since  1904  not  a  single  Republican  or  De- 
mocratic candidate  for  governor  has  resided  in  Detroit. 
As  to  the  secretary,  recent  Republican  practice  has  been  to 
select  a  man  who  has  had  secretarial  experience  at  Lansing 
or  Washington.  At  the  same  time  the  direct  primary  has 
made  the  Detroit  leaders  smaller  figures  in  state  politics, 
for  they  can  no  longer,  prior  to  the  naming  of  a  gubernatorial 

13  Chairmen:  E.  O.  Wood,  1904-1906;  John  T.  Winship,  1906-1908; 

E.  C.  Shields,  1908-1916;  A.  E.  Stevenson,  1916 ;  A.  R.  Canfield, 

secretary,   1904 . 

14  Detroit  News,  October  6,  1910. 

"Treasurers:  Homer  Warren,  1904-1906;  Paul  F.  Bagley,  1906- 
1908;  Charles  Moore,  1908-1910;  Frederick  M.  Alger,  1910-1914; 
Fred  W.  Green,  1914 . 

18  Treasurers:  J.  W.  Flynn,  1904-1906;  H.  E.  Thomas,  1908 . 

17  September  I,  1916. 


52 1 ]      COMMITTEE   SYSTEM   UNDER  DIRECT   PRIMARIES          85 

candidate,  trade  and  pull  wires  with  a  solid  delegation  of 
two  hundred  pawns.  Moreover,  practical  politics  in 
Detroit  is  on  about  the  same  moral  plane  as  it  was  a  decade 
ago,  although  outside  the  city  it  has  vastly  improved.  It 
may  well  be  that,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  the  majority 
outside  of  Detroit  demand  managers  who  accord  with  their 
own  standards  and  methods.18  But  it  is  always  difficult  to 
find  the  real  location  of  party  authority;  and,  as  we  shall 
see  later,  Detroiters  still  possess  much  of  the  substance  of 
power. 

Direct  primary  legislation  has  regulated  to  some  extent 
the  duties  of  the  state  central  committees,  in  some  cases 
recognizing  and  legalizing  old  duties.19  Under  the  law  of 
1905  the  state  committees  for  the  first  time  set  the  date  of 
county  conventions.20  The  laws  have  provided  that  the 
state  committees  should  set  the  date  and  place  of  state 
conventions,  but  the  date  of  the  conventions  and  the  calls 
for  them  are  subject  to  definite  time  limitations.21 

In  the  Taft-Roosevelt  contest  in  1912  the  Republican 
state  central  committee  occupied  a  pivotal  and  critical 
position.  Mr.  Knox,  the  chairman  of  the  committee,  was 
a  Roosevelt  man  and  held  an  office  in  the  Chicago  head- 
quarters of  the  Roosevelt  movement.  Secretary  King 
and  the  majority  of  the  committee  were  for  Taft.  The 
control  of  the  state  convention  depended  on  the  seating  of 
Taft  delegates  and  the  exclusion  of  Roosevelt  contesting 
delegations.  Shortly  before  the  convention  the  secretary 
called  a  meeting  of  the  committee  to  fix  the  temporary  roll 

18  In  an  interview  in  the  summer  of  1915  Mr.  Charles  Moore  of 
Detroit,  who  managed  Republican  campaigns  in  the  nineties,  empha- 
sized the  difference  in  political  methods  in  Detroit  and  in  the  State 
outside  and  a  resulting  lack  of  coordination  in  campaign  management 
between  the  two  regions.     See  also  Detroit  Free  Press,  February  23, 
1916. 

19  As,  for  example,  the  apportionment  of  delegates  among  the  coun- 
ties. 

20  Public  Acts,  1905,  No.  181. 

11  For  example,  the  state  convention  must  be  held  within  forty  days 
after  the  primary  but  not  less  than  ten  days  after  the  official  state 
canvass,  and  the  call  for  it  must  be  issued  at  least  thirty  days  prior  to 
the  first  Wednesday  in  September. 


86  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN  [522 

of  the  convention22  and  to  name  a  temporary  chairman  in 
place  of  a  Roosevelt  man  whom  Knox  had  named  for  that 
position.  As  a  result  of  bitter  struggles  in  the  primaries 
and  county  conventions  there  were  a  number  of  contests, 
including  one  of  decisive  importance  from  Wayne  County. 
The  central  committee  arranged  a  temporary  roll  which 
admitted  Taft  delegates  to  the  floor  and  the  secretary  issued 
tickets  to  these  delegates,  instructing  the  sergeant-at-arms 
to  exclude  from  the  hall  those  not  having  tickets.  Many 
Roosevelt  delegates  and  some  Taft  delegates  were  kept  from 
the  hall  by  the  police  and  by  national  guardsmen  who  had 
been  sent  to  the  scene  by  Governor  Osborn.  The  conven- 
tion, an  uncontrollable  mob,  was  called  to  order  simultan- 
eously by  Chairman  Knox  and  Secretary  King,  both  reading 
the  call.  When  Knox's  nominee  for  temporary  chairman 
reached  the  platform  a  Taft  man  promptly  knocked  him 
down.  Fist  fights  occurred  both  inside  and  outside  the  hall. 
Following  their  failure  to  control  the  temporary  organization 
the  Roosevelt  men  proceeded  to  hold  a  convention  in  the 
same  hall,  and  elected  a  contesting  delegation  to  the 
Chicago  convention.23  The  split  resulted  for  a  time  in  two 
state  committees  and  two  chairmen,  and  there  were  threats 
of  taking  the  contest  to  the  courts;  but  with  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  Progressive  party,  the  Taft  men  were  left  in 
possession  of  the  field.  Mr.  Knox  moved  from  the  State, 
thereby  vacating  the  chairmanship,  and  several  Roosevelt 
men  on  the  committee  resigned. 

22  Detroit  News,  April  9,  13,  June  13,  1912. 

23  Proceedings  of  the  Republican  National  Convention,   1912,  pp. 
138,  233,  235;  Detroit  News,  April  u,  17,  1912.     "For  the  first  time  in 
the  history  of  any  northern  state  the  militia  was  called  upon  to  take  a 
hand  in  the  running  of  a  political  convention.     For  the  first  time  in 
Michigan,  at  least,  policemen  in  full  uniform  and  with  clubs  tried  to 
maintain  a  semblance  of  order.     Policemen  with  their  clubs  knocked 
men  off  the  platform.  .  .  .  Within  the  armory  where  the  convention 
was  held  nearly  1000  delegates  fought  and  screamed.     Not  a  man  sat 
down.  ...  In  through  the  transom  over  the  doors  men  tried  to  force 
their  way  in,  only  to  be  knocked  back  by  sergeants-at-arms.  .  .  .  Out- 
side nearly  500  men,  in  whose  faces  the  doors  had  been  closed,  fought 
and  yelled  and  sought  means  of  gaining  entrance.  .  .  .  Motions  were 
made  and  carried,  resolutions  were  adopted,  yet  nobody  heard  a  word 
of  what  was  said  "  (Grand  Rapids  Herald,  April  12,  1912). 


523]      COMMITTEE   SYSTEM   UNDER  DIRECT   PRIMARIES          87 

Now  the  Roosevelt  men  contended  that  the  action  taken 
by  the  state  central  committee  was  a  violation  of  at  least 
five  party  rules:  (i)  the  establishment  of  a  temporary  roll 
was  a  violation  of  precedent;  (2)  the  meeting  of  the  com- 
mittee had  been  called  without  ten  days'  notice;  (3)  the 
meeting  should  have  been  called  by  the  chairman;  (4)  the 
chairman  of  the  committee,  and  not  the  committee  as  a 
whole,  is  the  director  of  a  state  convention;  and  (5)  the 
central  committee,  according  to  the  primary  law,  should 
have  been  elected  at  the  second  convention.24  The  Taft 
men  on  the  other  hand  held  that:  (i)  there  weie  precedents 
for  the  fixing  of  a  temporary  roll;  (2)  the  state  committee 
had  no  rules  as  to  the  calling  of  meetings ;  and  (3)  the  com- 
mittee itself  and  not  the  chairman  is  the  director  of  a  state 
convention.25  The  contention  of  the  Roosevelt  men  as  to 
the  election  of  the  state  central  committee  was  justified ;  and 
the  second  Republican  state  convention  repeated  the  elec- 
tion of  its  central  committee  and  state  chairman.  On  the 
whole,  however,  in  their  version  of  party  usage  the  Taft 
men  appear  to  have  been  correct.26  However  farcical  may 
have  been  the  proceedings  of  the  committee  and  the  organ- 
ization of  the  convention,  they  had  at  least  the  merit  of 
regularity.27 

An  equally  interesting  contest  of  a  different  nature 
occurred  in  the  Democratic  party  after  the  nomination  of 
Wilson  in  1912.  National  Committeeman  Wood  and  State 
Chairman  Shields  had  opposed  the  instructing  of  the 
Michigan  delegation  to  the  national  convention,  and  in  the 
early  balloting  at  Baltimore  the  majority  of  the  Michigan 
delegates  had  voted  for  Harmon  or  Clark.  According  to 
report,  Mr.  Wood  and  Mr.  Shields  swung  the  Michigan 
delegation  to  Wilson  in  accordance  with  a  bargain  by  which 
Mr.  McCombs  agreed  that,  in  case  no  Democratic  senators 

24  Detroit  News,  April  9,  1912. 

25  Ibid.,  April  12,  21,  1912;  Proceedings  of  the  Republican  National 
Convention,  1912,  p.  233. 

26  At  a  meeting  of  the  Republican  state  committee  in  August,  1912, 
Chairman   Groesbeck  appointed   a  subcommittee   on   rules    (Detroit 
Free  Press,  August  21,  1912). 

27  Files  of  the  Detroit  News,  interviews,  and  letters. 


88  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [524 

were  elected  from  Michigan,  Mr.  Wilson  in  the  distribution 
of  patronage  would  regard  the  national  committeeman  and 
state  chairman  as  though  they  were  the  two  senators  from 
the  State,  on  condition  that  these  two  would  agree  to  be 
fair  to  all  factions  in  the  party.28  After  the  Baltimore  con- 
vention Mr.  Wood  and  Mr.  Shields  retained  their  places  at 
the  head  of  the  party  in  Michigan,  and  after  the  election 
there  were  no  Democratic  senators  from  the  State.  The 
right  of  the  party  officials  to  hand  out  "plums"  was  now 
challenged  by  the  original  Wilson  men  who  had  worked  for 
the  selection  of  Wilson  delegates  and  who  had  been  opposed 
by  the  organization.  Interviews  which  these  men  secured 
at  Washington  appear  to  have  been  fruitless.  Cabinet 
members  and  Governor  Ferris  endorsed  the  Baltimore 
agreement.29  Nevertheless  some  of  the  original  Wilson 
men  organized  a  Progressive  Democratic  League  and  at- 
tempted in  1914  to  secure  control  of  the  state  organization.80 
To  fortify  itself  the  state  central  committee  passed  two 
resolutions:  (i)  that  the  secretary  of  the  committee  should 
prepare  a  roll  of  the  convention  from  lists  of  delegates 
returned  by  county  chairmen;  and  (2)  that  the  state  central 
committeemen  should  be  authorized  to  preside  at  the 
district  caucuses  which  should  elect  new  central  com- 
mitteemen.31 The  insurrectionary  movement  failed  to  win 
much  support,  and  in  the  state  convention  came  to  an 
inglorious  end.  The  working  arrangement  since  the  in- 
auguration of  President  Wilson  seems  to  have  been  about 
as  follows:  Within  the  districts  which  have  elected  Demo- 
crats to  Congress  patronage  has  been  dispensed  by  the 
congressmen,  and  outside  of  these  districts  the  national 
committeeman  has  acted  as  an  accredited  representative  of 
the  Michigan  Democracy.32  It  will  be  observed  that  under 

28  Detroit  News,  July  7,  10,  1912,  March  6,  1913,  and  interviews. 

29  Detroit  News,  March  7,  18,  1913. 

30  Ibid.,  August  7,  1913. 

31  Ibid.,  September  15,  1914. 

82  For  examples  of  his  activity  at  Washington,  see  Detroit  News, 
October  21,  23,  1915;  Detroit  Free  Press,  August  9,  1916.  The  Kala- 
mazoo  postmastership,  however,  was  given  to  an  original  Wilson  man, 
who  was  bitterly  opposed  by  the  organization. 


525]      COMMITTEE   SYSTEM   UNDER  DIRECT   PRIMARIES          89 

circumstances  somewhat  similar  to  those  which  existed  in 
Cleveland's  second  term  the  present  administration  has 
followed  a  different  and  it  would  seem  a  more  logical  method 
in  the  dispensing  of  patronage.33 

The  national  committeeman  continues  to  play  a  more 
important  part  in  the  Democratic  party  organization  than 
does  the  state  chairman.  In  1908  a  determined  effort  in  the 
Democratic  party  to  wrest  the  leadership  of  the  organization 
from  the  Bryan  men  resolved  itself  into  a  contest,  which  was 
successful,  to  depose  D.  J.  Campau,  who  had  been  national 
committeeman  since  1892.  He  was  succeeded  by  Mr. 
Wood,  who  after  his  reelection  by  popular  vote  in  1916 
resigned.  Judge  W.  F.  Connolly  of  Detroit,  the  dominating 
spirit  of  the  party,  was  chosen  to  succeed  him.34  Recent 
Republican  national  committeemen  have,  according  to 
custom,  been  men  of  wealth.35 

In  the  Republican  national  convention  in  1912  a  resolu- 
tion was  adopted  that  the  national  committee  be  authorized 
to  fill  all  vacancies  in  its  membership  and  to  declare  vacant 
the  seat  of  any  one  not  supporting  the  nominees.36  It  was 
stated  in  the  course  of  the  discussion  that  there  had  never 
been  any  provision  in  the  Republican  party  for  the  recall 
of  members  of  the  national  committee.37  At  the  meeting 
of  the  Democratic  national  committee  in  January,  1912, 
the  fact  appeared  that  since  1908  the  practice  in  the  Demo- 
cratic party  has  been  to  allow  the  state  committees  to  fill 
vacancies  on  the  national  committee,  but  the  national 
committee  has  power  to  expel  a  member  after  granting  him 
a  hearing.38  The  Democratic  platform  adopted  at  Balti- 
more advocated  the  primary  election  of  national  committee- 
men,  and  in  accordance  with  the  platform  a  bill  for  this 

33  See  above,  pages  28-29. 

34  Detroit  Free  Press,  May  21,  July  7,  1908.      In  the  contest  for 
national  committeeman  the  original  Wilson  men  were  again  defeated. 

35  John  W.  Blodgett,  1900-1912;  Charles  B.  Warren,  1912 . 

36  Cf.  G.  S.  P.  Kleeberg,  The  Formation  of  the  Republican  Party 
as  a  National  Political  Organization,  p.  199. 

37  Proceedings  of  the  Republican  National  Convention,  1912,  pp. 

337-443- 

38  Proceedings  of  the  Democratic  National  Convention,  1912,  pp. 

439-445- 


9O  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN  [526 

purpose  was  introduced  into  the  Michigan  legislature  by  a 
Democratic  member  at  the  request  of  Mr.  Wood.39  The  bill 
as  passed  makes  no  provision  for  the  filling  of  vacancies. 
It  simply  provides  that  the  candidate  for  national  commit- 
teeman  receiving  the  highest  number  of  votes  in  the  primary 
"shall  be  declared  to  be  the  candidate  and  the  choice  of  such 
political  party  for  the  office  of  national  committeeman."40 

39  Letter  from  Mr.  Wood,  November  10,  1915. 

"Public  Acts,  1913,  No.  392;  Public  Acts,  1915,  No.  151.  The 
Democratic  primary  contest  for  national  committeeman  in  1916  aroused 
extraordinary  interest. 


CHAPTER  V 
DIRECT  NOMINATIONS  IN  OPERATION 

Michigan  has  now  had  direct  nominations  for  fifteen 
years,  a  period  of  experimentation  too  short  for  the  estab- 
lishment of  confident  conclusions.  The  politicians  who 
have  been  framing  and  applying  direct  primary  laws  and 
conducting  party  activities  under  these  laws  have  been  men 
trained  in  the  old  methods  of  nomination,  and  are  in  many 
cases  not  only  unused  but  hostile  to  the  new  order.  The 
biennial  agitation  of  the  nomination  question,  moreover, 
and  the  consequent  amending  of  the  laws  have  had  the 
effect  that  constant  tinkering  produces  on  machinery. 
These  circumstances  have  probably  discouraged  the  par- 
ticipation of  many  people  in  the  primaries,  and  they  have 
certainly  colored  our  sources  of  information.  The  difficulty 
arises  also  of  distinguishing  effects  produced  by  details  of  a 
law  from  the  effects  produced  by  the  whole  law.  Are 
certain  results  produced  by  the  general  principle  or  by  the 
particular  method  of  applying  the  general  principle? 
Moreover,  to  increase  the  difficulty  still  more,  phenomena 
which  appear  in  the  operation  of  direct  nominations  and  are 
apparently  to  be  attributed  to  them  may  with  equal  logic 
be  ascribed  to  local  or  temporary  conditions,  to  personalities, 
to  issues,  or  to  parallel  and  related  tendencies.  In  the  light 
of  these  difficulties  a  study  of  direct  nominations  in  opera- 
tion must  of  necessity  be  unsatisfactory  as  to  data  and 
tentative  as  to  conclusions. 

Conditions  at  the  Polls. — Governmental  control  of  the 
primaries  resulted  immediately  in  an  improved  political 
atmosphere  of  the  polling  place.  From  the  first  there  has 
been  a  conspicuous  absence  of  electioneering,  ward  heelers, 

91 


92  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN  [528 

and  "strong-arm"  methods.1     Money  may  have  been  used, 
but  not  so  effectively  as  under  the  old  system.2 

The  Prenomination  Campaign. — The  prenomination  cam- 
paign has  become  more  personal,  more  direct,  and  more 
educative,  resembling  in  many  respects  the  regular  electoral 
canvass.  Under  the  old  system  of  nomination,  when  county 
conventions  were  held  on  different  days,  skilled  managers 
went  from  county  to  county  pulling  wires  in  the  interests 
of  particular  candidates;  but  the  provision  of  the  direct 
primary  law  requiring  all  county  conventions  of  the  same 
party  to  be  held  on  the  same  day  has  done  away  with  this 
practice.  Another  provision  has  made  illegal  the  hiring  of 
personal  workers.  Candidates  as  far  as  possible  appeal 
directly  to  the  voters  rather  than  to  the  party  leaders  and 
party  workers.  Now,  as  formerly,  the  candidates  make  use 
of  headquarters,  political  managers  and  secretaries,  literary 
bureaus,  publicity  agents,  county  managers,  clubs,  and 
local  committees.3  In  1910  the  Republican  candidates  for 
governor  and  United  States  senator  began  to  furnish  plate 
matter  to  the  newspapers  ten  months  before  the  primary.4 
Mr.  Osborn's  manager  stated  in  that  year  that  his  chief 
had  a  complete  working  force  in  every  county  except  three, 
and  that  at  headquarters  five  stenographers  were  busy 
during  the  campaign.5  The  candidate  for  governor  or 
senator  must  conduct  a  long  and  strenuous  speaking  tour 
and  do  most  of  the  speaking  himself.  In  1910  the  primary 
campaign  of  the  successful  Republican  candidate  for  gover- 
nor lasted  for  eight  months,  and  during  this  time,  according 
to  a  newspaper  report,  he  delivered  eight  hundred  speeches 
and  travelled  sixteen  thousand  miles,  most  of  the  distance 
by  automobile.6  County  and  district  candidates  aim  to 

1  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  March  6,   1901,  March   19,    1903.     John 
Patton  said  in  the  Republican  state  judicial  convention  in  1903:  "Where 
we  have  tried  the  new  primary,  our  caucuses  are  as  orderly  as  a  prayer- 
meeting"  (Detroit  Tribune,  March  7,  1903). 

2  Butterfield,  p.  20. 

8  Detroit  News,  April  25,  May  18,  31,  June  I,  14,  July  7,  13,  15,  19, 
August  16,  22,  23,  29,  October  n,  1910,  August  16,  1912. 
4  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  September  18,  1910. 
6  Detroit  News,  October  n,  1910. 
6  Detroit  Free  Press,  September  5,  1910. 


529]  DIRECT  NOMINATIONS   IN   OPERATION  93 

get  into  personal  relations  with  the  voters,  and  in  doing  so 
make  a  considerable  expenditure  of  time  and  money,  an 
expenditure  which  was  generally  unnecessary  under  the 
convention  system.  Preprimary  campaigns,  of  course,  take 
place  only  in  the  event  of  a  contested  nomination,  and  occur, 
therefore,  mainly  in  the  Republican  party.  Accordingly  the 
physical  burden  which  they  impose  rests  more  heavily  on 
the  candidate  in  the  majority  than  in  the  minority 
party. 

Expenses  of  the  Primary  Campaign. — That  the  financial 
burden  imposed  on  the  candidate  is  greater  under  the  direct 
primary  is  a  complaint  frequently  expressed  but  appar- 
ently with  only  partial  justification.  One  of  the  objections 
to  the  convention  system  was  that  under  it  a  poor  man 
could  not  get  a  nomination.7  Although  it  was  reported  that 
Republican  governors  in  the  early  nineties  secured  nomina- 
tion at  an  expense  not  exceeding  $1000  or  $2000, 8  an 
experienced  politician  in  1896  estimated  that  a  campaign 
for  a  nomination,  presumably  for  the  office  of  governor, 
would  cost  approximately  $40,000, 9  and  the  amount  spent 
by  each  of  the  Republican  candidates  in  1900  and  1902  has 
been  commonly  estimated  at  not  less  than  $100,000. 10 
Under  the  new  system  there  have  been  several  sources  of 
expense  that  were  more  or  less  unknown  under  the  old;  for 
example,  fees,11  petitions,12  advertising,  halls,  and  auto- 
mobiles. On  the  other  hand  secret  expenditures  were 
much  greater  in  the  old  days,  taking  the  form  of  payment 

7  See  above,  page  53. 

8  Detroit  News,  May  14,  1912.     But  suggestions  were  made  in  1894 
that  it  would  take  from  $25,000  to  $50,000  (Detroit  Free  Press,  April 
19,  July  10,  1894). 

9  Detroit  Tribune,  January  20,  1896. 

10  See  above,  pages  39,  53- 

11  The  fee  system,  however,  was  never  introduced  into  the  general 
laws.     It  proved  objectionable  in  Kent  County,  especially  to  the  candi- 
dates in  the  minority  party,  and  the  provision  regarding  it  was  held 
void  by  the  supreme  court. 

12  For  circulating  petitions  candidates  pay  from  three  to  five  cents 
a  name  (Grand  Rapids  Herald,  September  18,  1910;  Detroit  News, 
April  25,  1910). 


94  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN  [530 

for  entertainment,13  for  personal  workers,  and  for  direct 
bribery.14 

Up  to  1914,  figures  of  expenditure  in  the  direct  primary 
are  as  unofficial  and  inaccurate  as  those  for  the  convention 
system.  In  the  first  state  primary  campaign  in  1906  there 
were  no  contests  in  either  party ;  but  the  Republican  guber- 
natorial contests  of  1908  and  1910  were  extremely  close,  and 
probably  more  expensive  than  any  that  have  followed.15 
Governor  Warner,  one  of  the  candidates  in  1908,  had 
already  declared  in  a  message  to  the  legislature  that  the 
direct  primary  was  too  expensive  both  to  the  candidate  and 
to  the  public.16  In  1910  one  of  the  Republican  candidates 
for  governor  was  said  to  have  spent  a  little  over  $io,ooo.17 
A  writer  for  the  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  however,  estimated 
that  each  of  the  three  candidates  for  governor  must  have 
spent  about  $9O,ooo.18  The  actual  expenditure  was  prob- 
ably somewhere  between  these  figures.  In  1912  one  of  the 
Republican  candidates  attempted  unsuccessfully  to  get  an 
agreement  with  the  other  to  limit  the  use  of  money  in  the 
primary  campaign  to  $5OOO,19  and  the  natural  inference  is 
that  more  than  that  amount  was  spent  in  the  campaign. 

The  corrupt  practice  act  passed  in  I9I320  limits  the 
nomination  expenses  of  candidates  and  requires  the  filing 
of  sworn  financial  statements.  The  law  prohibits  expen- 
diture in  excess  of  twenty-five  per  cent  of  one  year's  com- 
pensation or  salary,  but  provides  that  candidates  for 
governor  and  lieutenant-governor  may  spend  fifty  per  cent. 
The  law  requires  the  filing  of  statements  within  ten  days 

13  "It's  this  going  around  from  one  bar  to  another  and  treating  that 
costs,"  said  a  Detroit  alderman  in  1896  (Detroit  Tribune,  January  20, 
1896).     A  Detroit  politician  said  in  an  interview  in  1898  that  the  first 
step  in  electing  a  man  was  to  get  the  endorsement  of  the  ward  workers 
in  a  saloon  meeting.     "I  make  my  candidate  walk  through  the  ward 
every  night,  distributing  beer  checks  to  the  boys"  (ibid.,  October  23, 
1898). 

14  See  above,  page  53. 

15  Detroit  Free  Press,  August  19,  1907. 

16  Ibid.,  January  4,  1907. 

17  Detroit  News,  April  19,  1912. 

18  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  September  18,  1910. 

19  Detroit  News,  May  14,  1912. 

20  Public  Acts,  1913,  No.  109.     See  above,  page  7off. 


53 1]  DIRECT   NOMINATIONS   IN  OPERATION  95 

after  the  primary.  A  congressman  expressed  the  opinion 
that  the  limit  for  congressional  candidates,  $5000,  is  too 
low.  If  he  is  correct,  $2500  is  assuredly  too  small  an  amount 
for  a  gubernatorial  candidate  who  has  to  address  a  body  of 
voters  thirteen  times  as  large;  for  merely  to  mail  one 
postal  card  to  each  of  the  221,688  Republicans21  who  voted 
in  1914  would  cost  $22i6.8822 

In  general  in  the  counties  which  have  come  particularly 
under  my  observation23  candidates  appear  to  have  filed 
statements  according  to  the  law,  but  in  many  cases  the 
statements  themselves  are  incomplete  or  false.  They 
appear  to  be  most  accurate  in  the  rural  counties  and  least 
reliable  in  the  large  cities.  They  are  highly  instructive; 
but  unfortunately  the  law  has  prescribed  no  uniform  scheme 
of  itemization.  In  the  primary  campaign  of  1914  the  three 
leading  Republican  candidates  spent  the  following  amounts : 
Mr.  Martindale,  $2425?*  Mr.  Groesbeck,  $2i35.o7;25  and 
Mr.  Osborn,  the  successful  candidate,  $i822.46.26  As  the 
governor's  salary  is  $5000,  only  one  amount  was  near  the 
legal  limit.  For  the  Democratic  nomination  Governor 
Ferris  had  no  opposition ;  therefore  the  whole  expense  borne 
by  the  committee  self-appointed  to  secure  his  renomination 
was  for  the  circulation  of  petitions,  which  cost  $102. 50." 

In  the  congressional  primary  in  the  first  district,  which  is 
the  southern  half  of  the  city  of  Detroit,  the  expenditures  of 
the  six  Republican  candidates  were  as  follows:  $161.36; 
$651 .89 ;  $16 1 ;  $2 1 1 .35 ;  $i  141 .96 ;  $288.04.  The  Democratic 
candidate,  who  was  unopposed,  spent  nothing.28  The  state- 
ments filed  with  the  clerk  of  the  House  of  Representatives 

21  According  to  the  vote  for  secretary  of  state. 

22  One  of  the  Republican  candidates  in  1912  said  in  a  newspaper 
interview  that  he  had  tried  to  reach  every  registered  voter  with  printed 
matter  (Detroit  News,  July  18,  1912).     In  1916  one  of  the  Republican 
candidates  charged  that  some  of  his  opponents  were  spending  $25,000 
instead  of  $2500  (Detroit  Free  Press,  August  3,  1916). 

23  Wayne,    Washtenaw,    Livingston,    Ingham,    Jackson,     Calhoun, 
Kalamazoo,  Kent,  and  Ionia. 

24  Statement  in  office  of  Wayne  County  clerk. 

25  Statement  in  office  of  Wayne  County  clerk. 

26  Statement  in  office  of  Chippewa  County  clerk. 

27  Statement  in  office  of  Ingham  County  clerk. 

28  Statements  in  the  office  of  the  clerk  of  the  House  of  Representatives. 


96  PARTY   ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN  [532 

show  that  the  primary  expenditure  of  congressional  candi- 
dates was  considerably  larger  in  1914  than  in  1912,  partly 
on  account  of  the  larger  number  of  contested  nominations 
in  1914.  The  average  expense  of  Republican  aspirants  in 
1912  was  $287.69,  in  1914,  $404.77.  Those  Republicans 
who  had  to  fight  for  places  on  the  ticket  disbursed  in  1912 
an  average  of  $417.16,  in  1914,  $559.87.  The  successful 
candidates  spent  considerably  more  than  the  unsuccessful. 
Compared  with  their  opponents  the  Democrats,  even  in 
contested  districts,  spent  little.  No  candidate  in  either 
year  approached  the  limit  of  expenditure,  which  for  con- 
gressional candidates  is  $5OOO.29 

In  studying  the  expenses  of  county  candidates  we  have 
the  advantage  of  possessing  data  from  various  counties, 
although  unfortunately  for  only  one  campaign,  that  of  1914. 
The  relation  of  primary  expenditure  to  party  strength  is 
well  illustrated  by  a  comparison  of  Ingham  and  Washtenaw 

29  U.  S.  Stat.  L.,  v.  37,  p.  28.  The  statements  filed  with  the  clerk 
of  the  House  show  the  following  expenditures  of  congressional  candi- 
dates in  Michigan  in  the  primary  contests  of  1912  and  1914: 

1912"  1914 

Total  expenses  of  all  candidates $6618.71  $12004.02 

Total  expenses  of  all  Rep.  candidates 6041.66  10119.29 

Total  expenses  of  all  Dem.  candidates 577-O5  1884.73 

Average  expenses  of  all  candidates 178.88  255.40 

Average  expenses  of  Rep.  candidates 287.69  404.77 

Average  expenses  of  Dem.  candidates 36.06  85-67 

Number  of  Rep.  contests 5.00  6.00 

Number  of  Dem.  contests 2.00  6.00 

Number  of  districts  with  no  contests 6.00  3.00 

Average  expenses  of  uncontested  candidates 50.99  58.23b 

Average  expenses  of  contested  candidates 313.88  360.92 

Average  expenses  of  Rep.  contested  candidates.  .  .  417.16  559-87 

Average  expenses  of  Dem.  contested  candidates. ...  105.55  73-4° 
Averagfe  expenses  of  successful  Rep.  candidates  in 

contested  districts 543-O8  730.10 

Average  expenses  of  successful  Dem.  candidates  in 

contested  districts 65.30  90.48' 

•  No  statements  were  filed  by  candidates  in  three  districts  and  in  the 
State  at  large.  Presumably  there  were  no  contests  and  no  expenses  in 
these  districts  and  in  the  State  at  large. 

b  The  average  was  greatly  raised  by  an  uncontested  Democrat  in  the 
thirteenth  district  who  for  some  reason  spent  $700. 

c  Omitting  the  ninth  district,  in  which  there  were  two  candidates, 
one  spending  $30  and  the  other  nothing.  I  do  not  know  which  was 
nominated  in  the  primary. 


533] 


DIRECT  NOMINATIONS   IN   OPERATION 


97 


counties,  counties  which  may  be  considered  typical  normal 
counties  of  the  lower  peninsula,  being  neither  predominantly 
urban  nor  predominantly  rural.  They  are  nearly  equal  in 
population  and  in  the  salaries  of  their  county  officers;  but 
Ingham  is  strongly  Republican,  and  in  Washtenaw  the 
Democrats  have  a  fighting  chance.  Although  the  total 
expenditures  for  the  principal  county  offices  were  almost 
exactly  the  same  in  the  two  counties,  in  Ingham  County, 
where  there  were  Republican  contests,  the  Republican 
candidates  spent  93  per  cent  of  the  total;  in  Washtenaw 
County,  where  there  were  contests  in  both  parties,  the 
Republicans  spent  only  45  per  cent  of  the  total.30  In 
Wayne  and  Kent  counties  the  expenses  of  individual  can- 
didates for  county  offices  run  high.  In  1914  a  candidate 
for  county  clerk  in  Wayne  County  spent  $i834.86.31 

Although  data  for  the  primary  campaigns  before  1914 
are  lacking,  it  appears  that  irrespective  of  legal  limitations 

30  The  following  table  shows  the  expenditures  in  primaries  for  five 
county  offices  in  Ingham  and  Washtenaw  counties  in  1914:* 


Office 

Ingham 

Washten»w 

Rep. 

Dem. 

Rep. 

Dem. 

Sheriff  

$    H3.00 
78.08 
186.30 
46.35 
3-70 

39.00 
118.91 
87.40 
96.38 
108.15 
56.20 
5942 
21-75 

8.80 

39.01 
16.43 

$112.92 
116.79 
1  1  1  .40 

142.76 

$      66.49 
207.72 
102.95 

109.62 
93-70 

Prosecuting  attorney.  .  . 
County  clerk  

Register  of  deeds  

County  treasurer  

Total.    .                    .    . 

$1014.64 

$      64.24 
1014.64 

$483.87 

$580.48 
483.87 

Grand  total  

$1078.88 

$1064.35 

'Statements   in  county    clerks'   offices,    Ingham   and  Washtenaw 
counties. 

31  Statement  in  office  of  Wayne  County  clerk. 

7 


98  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN  [534 

there  has  been  a  tendency  for  expenditures  to  decrease. 
A  politician  states  that  at  the  first  primary  election  in  his 
county,  that  of  1906,  he  won  the  Republican  nomination 
against  four  opponents  with  an  expenditure  of  $1700,  $400 
for  postage  alone  ;32  but  in  1914  in  the  same  county  the  largest 
amount  spent  by  any  of  five  candidates  for  sheriff,  the  most 
attractive  office,  was  $129. 33  The  opinion  of  this  poli- 
tician is  that  expenses  tend  to  grow  less  as  the  methods 
and  the  necessities  of  primary  campaigning  become  better 
known. 

In  general,  as  we  have  seen,  expenditure  depends  in  the 
first  place  on  the  existence  of  a  contest;  and,  in  case  of  a 
contest,  it  bears  some  relation  to  the  salary  of  the  office 
sought,  and  is  limited  by  the  wealth  of  the  candidate,  by 
his  willingness  to  spend,  and  finally  by  the  law  and  its 
enforcement.  There  is  a  great  diversity  of  opinion  with 
regard  to  the  comparative  financial  burdens  of  the  conven- 
tion and  the  direct  nomination  system;  but  the  available 
data  indicate  that  the  direct  primary  is  less  expensive  for 
state  candidates  and  probably  more  expensive  for  county 
candidates,  expenditure  for  all  candidates  tending,  how- 
ever, to  decrease. 

A  skillful  chairman  of  the  Wayne  County  Republican 
committee  estimated  in  1 896  that  out  of  a  total  expenditure 
of  about  $40,000,  a  candidate,  presumably  for  the  office  for 
governor,  would  spend  $5000  for  a  political  manager, 
$10,000  for  paid  agents,  $2000  for  local  workers,  and  $5000 
for  advertising.34  In  the  primary  campaign  of  1914  Mr. 
Martindale  and  Mr.  Groesbeck,  Detroit  candidates  for 
governor,  each  devoted  almost  one  half  of  his  outlay  to 
advertising;35  and  in  general  candidates  are  spending  now 

32  "I  toured  every  township  in  the  county  four  times,  paying  ten 
dollars  a  day  for  a  rig,  and  my  opponents  did  the  same.  After  my 
nomination  the  board  of  supervisors  cut  the  compensation  of  the  office 
from  fees  amounting  to  about  $4000.00  a  year  to  a  salary  of  $1500.00." 

31  Statement,  Calhoun  County.  In  1914  the  nomination  for  clerk 
was  not  contested. 

M  Detroit  Tribune,  January  20,  1896. 

15  Statements,  Wayne  County. 


535]  DIRECT  NOMINATIONS   IN   OPERATION  99 

much  more  relatively  for  printing  and  advertising  and,  if 
they  observe  the  law,  nothing  for  personal  workers.  In  the 
statements  filed  by  county  candidates  the  contrast  between 
the  old  and  the  new  becomes  still  more  striking.  Their 
principal  disbursements  are  for  newspaper  advertising, 
cuts,  and  cards,  with  an  occasional  payment  for  automobile 
hire,  printing,  postage,  and  travelling  expenses.  In  the 
almost  total  absence  of  prosecutions  for  violations  of  the 
corrupt  practice  act  it  is  difficult  to  make  a  statement  as  to 
the  prevalence  or  the  character  of  expenditures  for  objects 
prohibited  by  law.  It  is  doubtful  if  city  candidates  observe 
very  scrupulously  the  prohibition  as  to  treating,36  and  it  is 
charged  also  that  candidates  still  employ  paid  workers.37 

Petitions. — The  filing  of  petitions  for  places  on  the 
primary  ballot,  although  an  improvement  over  the  fee 
system,  has  not  proved  a  satisfactory  method  of  securing 
and  exhibiting  popular  endorsement,  many  considering  it  a 
worse  than  useless  form.  Men  who  circulate  petitions  are 
paid  three,  four,  or  five  cents  a  name.  Under  the  circum- 
stances the  petitions  contain  many  duplications  and  the 
names  of  those  who  are  not  registered  voters.  The  enroll- 
ment feature  in  force  until  1913  caused  special  inconvenience 
in  the  circulation  and  filing  of  petitions.  Experience  showed 
that  in  the  cities  about  fifty  per  cent  of  the  names  had  to  be 
struck  off  as  not  being  the  names  of  enrolled  voters ;  in  rural 
districts,  about  seventy-five  per  cent  of  the  names  on 
petitions  were  good.38  A  Republican  county  chairman 
charges  that  the  Democratic  leaders  in  his  county  call 
voters  up  over  the  telephone  and  ask  them  if  they  will  sign 
petitions;  when  a  reply  is  favorable,  the  leaders  simply 
write  down  the  name.  Arrests  have  been  made  in  Detroit 
for  forging  names  on  nomination  petitions. 

The   Vote  in  the  Primary. — The  belief  that  the  direct 

16  It  has  been  suggested  that  the  spread  of  local  option  prohibition 
tends  to  make  campaign  expenses  less  on  account  of  the  impossibility 
of  treating  in  dry  counties.  The  anti-treating  provisions  in  the  corrupt 
practice  law  were  welcomed  by  most  candidates. 

37  See  above,  page  94. 

38  Detroit  News,  July  9,  1912. 


IOO 


PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN 


[536 


primary  would  evoke  popular  interest  and  lead  to  a  more 
general  participation  in  the  making  of  nominations  was  an 
influential  factor  in  the  establishment  of  the  system.  It  is 
the  opinion  of  some  that  the  direct  primary  has  reduced 
the  vote  in  the  general  election.  If  the  convention  system 
encouraged  and  the  direct  primary  system  discourages 
voting  in  the  election,  the  primary  and  election  returns 
under  the  two  systems  do  not  afford  an  equitable  basis  of 
comparison.  There  are  some  reasons  for  thinking  that  the 
direct  primary  does  affect  participation  in  elections.  At 
this  point,  however,  it  appears  justifiable  to  disregard  these 
considerations  and  also  the  large  number  who,  although 
qualified  by  age,  residence,  and  registration,  do  not  go  to 
the  polls.39  Perhaps  logically  the  stay-at-homes  should  be 

REPUBLICAN  PRIMARY  VOTE  IN  PERCENTAGES40 


1908 

1910 

1912 

1914 

The  State  

61 

86 

QO 

9^ 

Seven  counties  with  most  foreign-born  and 
illiterates41  

64 

I2O 

I^d 

IO9 

Seven   counties   with   fewest   foreign-born 
and  illiterates42  

54. 

60 

SI 

46 

Seven  counties  most  predominantly  rural43 
Wayne  County44  .  .  . 

68 

47 

80 

81 

90 

82 

60 

I^O 

Kent  County 

7-1 

1  08 

76 

IDS 

Detroit:    First,    second,   and    seventeenth 
wards45  

45 

86 

76 

146 

Detroit:  fifth,  seventh,  ninth,  and  eleventh 
wards48  

48 

IOO 

83 

2O2 

Seven  controlled  precincts47  

48 

88 

77 

156 

89  See  below,  pages  166-168. 

40  Based  on  the  party  vote  for   secretary  of   state  in  the  succeeding 
November  election.     I  am  disregarding  the  vote  for  1906  because  in 
that  year  there  was  no  contest  in  either  party. 

41  Alger,   Baraga,  Cheboygan,   Iron,  Mackinac,  Presque  Isle,  and 
Schoolcraft. 

42  Calhoun,  Hillsdale,  Ionia,  Lenawee,  Livingston,  St.  Joseph,  and 
Washtenaw. 

43  Barry,   Clinton,   Hillsdale,   Lapeer,   Livingston,   Montcalm,   and 
Van  Buren. 

44  Wayne  County  contains  the  city  of  Detroit ;  Kent  County,  the 
city  of  Grand  Rapids. 

45  These  are  the  highest  class  residence  wards. 

46  These  wards  contain  the  highest  percentage  of  foreign-born  voters 
and  are  conceded  to  be  the  worst  wards  in  the  city. 

47  In  these  precincts  the  saloon  vote  is  the  largest. 


537] 


DIRECT   NOMINATIONS   IN   OPERATION 


101 


DEMOCRATIC  PRIMARY  VOTE  IN  PERCENTAGES 


1908 

1910 

1912 

1914 

The  State  

6 

16 

25 

IQ 

Seven  counties  with  most  foreign-born  and 
illiterates  

II 

18 

27 

16 

Seven  counties  with  fewest  foreign-born  and 
illiterates  

6 

17 

2s; 

33 

Seven  counties  most  predominantly  rural  .  . 
Wayne  County  

8 

7 

15 
27 

27 

77 

18 

22 

Kent  County  

Q 

12 

18 

IQ 

Detroit:     First,    second,  and   seventeenth 
wards  

6 

22 

27 

2O 

Detroit:  Fifth,  seventh,  ninth,  and  eleventh 
wards  

q 

4.7 

4Q 

44- 

Seven  controlled  precincts  

5 

20 

22 

12 

counted  in  the  party  membership,  but  they  are  passive 
rather  than  active  members.  It  simplifies  the  problem  to 
consider  as  party  members  only  those  who  vote,  for  instance, 
in  the  general  election  for  the  party  candidate  for  secretary 
of  state. 

In  the  local  direct  primaries  prior  to  1906  the  vote  was 
satisfactory.  An  able  politician  estimated  the  vote  at  the 
first  direct  primary  in  Detroit  in  1903  to  be  from  one 
hundred  to  two  hundred  per  cent  greater  than  the  vote  at  the 
corresponding  primaries  under  the  old  system.48  In  Grand 
Rapids  the  total  primary  vote  showed  an  increase  from  392 1 
in  1901  to  7668  in  1902  and  8213  in  I9O3-49 

It  will  be  observed  in  the  tables  given  above  that  the 
Republican  vote  has  increased  from  sixty-one  per  cent  of  the 
party  membership  in  1908  to  ninety-three  per  cent  in  1914, 
and  that  the  Democratic  vote,  unstimulated  by  contests, 
reached  twenty-five  per  cent  in  1912,  relapsing  to  nineteen 
in  1914.  In  the  seven  counties  containing  the  largest 
number  of  foreign-born  and  illiterate  voters  the  Republican 
vote  has  been  far  above  the  percentage  for  the  State,  in  the 
last  three  primaries  exceeding  the  party  membership ;  in  the 
seven  counties  containing  the  fewest  foreign-born  and 
illiterate  voters  the  percentage  has  been  considerably  below 

48  Simons,  p.  138. 

_49  The  following  table  shows  the  Republican  vote  in  local  direct 
primaries  for  certain  localities:0 


IO2 


PARTY   ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN 


[538 


that  for  the  State.  In  the  urban  counties  the  vote  has 
generally  been  heavier  than  in  the  rural.  In  Detroit  the 
vote  in  the  four  wards  conceded  to  be  the  worst  in  the  city 
has  always  been  markedly  heavier  than  that  in  the  best 
wards,  and  in  1914  the  Republican  vote  in  the  worst  wards 
was  over  twice  the  party  membership.  The  light  Demo- 
cratic vote  has  been  much  more  uniform  than  the  heavy 
Republican  vote.  Popular  participation,  therefore,  has  in 
both  parties  been  more  general  than  in  the  primaries  of  the 
old  order;  but  unfortunately  the  voting  in  the  majority 
party  is  quantitatively  best  where  the  electorate  appears 
to  be  qualitatively  worst.  A  comparison  of  the  total 
primary  vote  with  the  total  election  vote  shows  that  the 


Locality 

Date 

Nomination  for 

Primary 
Vote 

Vote  in 
Election 

Grand  Rapids  

IQOI 

City  clerk 

2115 

7S64. 

Grand  Rapids  

IQO-* 

City  clerk 

6Q64. 

7458 

Grand  Rapids  

IQO2 

State  senator 

2428 

68OS 

Wayne  County  

190  •; 

County  auditor 

1^748 

15461 

Wayne  County  

1008 

County  clerk 

^6767 

4.Q2I1 

Fifth  district  

1  007 

Congressman 

Grand  Rapids  

92O7 

19O^ 

Kent  township  .... 

•*6^5 

1845 

Ionia  County  

2812 

2O4.  1 

Ottawa  County.  .  .  . 

4.8IO 

4OQ8 

Grand  Rapids  

IQO7 

City  clerk 

IO552 

8087 

Detroit  

1008 

Mayor 

55II4. 

^4Q2Q 

Grand  Rapids  

1910 

Mayor 

8165 

766  "5 

Grand  Rapids  

I9O5 

City  treasurer 

7072 

75Q^ 

Wayne  County  

I  OO4. 

Sheriff 

5O4Q6 

^6650 

Kent  County  

IQO4. 

Sheriff 

I^6ll 

I7OM 

Grand  Rapids  

IQO4. 

Mayor 

71^4 

6158 

Detroit  

IQO4 

Mayor 

4.5O4.5 

^5212 

Wayne  County  

I  OO4. 

Prosecuting  attorney 

4.6710 

45575 

Wayne  County  

IQO5 

Sheriff 

^4568 

22071 

Grand  Rapids  

IQOI 

City  clerk 

17^7 

4067 

Grand  Rapids  

IQOI 

City  clerk 

1^17 

48^2 

Wayne  County  

loxn 

County  auditor 

764.1 

I42QI 

Grand  Rapids  

I9O5 

Judge 

1212 

4532 

Wayne  County  

I9O5 

Sheriff 

7IOO 

^IIO 

Grand  Rapids  

I9IO 

Mayor 

1428 

6674 

•Grand  Rapids  Herald,  March  6,  1901,  October  15,  1902,  March 
20,  1903,  March  16,  September  15,  1904,  March  16,  1905;  Detroit 
Tribune,  March  18,  1903,  October  21,  1904,  January  19,  March  8,  1905; 
Grand  Rapids  Herald,  March  14,  1906,  March  13, 1907,  September  2, 
1908;  Detroit  Free  Press,  October  7,  1908. 


539] 


DIRECT  NOMINATIONS   IN  OPERATION 


103 


primary  vote  for  the  State  has  averaged  since  1906  less  than 
half  the  election  vote.50 

In  1912  the  combined  Republican  and  Progressive  vote  in 
the  primary  was  forty-nine  per  cent  of  their  combined  vote 
in  the  election.  The  Progressives,  however,  had  no  contest 
in  the  primary.  On  the  whole  it  seems  fair  to  suppose  that 
if  there  had  been  no  Republican  split  in  1912  the  Republicans 
would  have  cast  in  the  primary  more  than  forty-nine  per 
cent  of  their  election  vote  but  considerably  less  than  the 
eighty-six  per  cent  of  1910.  In  other  words  the  real 
Republican  primary  vote  as  compared  with  the  party 
membership  was  less  in  1912  than  in  1910  or  1914,  but  the 
Democratic  vote  was  larger  in  1912  than  in  1910  or  1914. 
Many  explanations  may  be  offered  for  these  reciprocal 
fluctuations,  but  one  reason  is  found  in  legislative  attempts 
to  curb  Democratic  participation  in  Republican  primaries, 
— an  admitted  evil  and  a  most  difficult  and  persistent  prob- 
lem. To  reduce  this  evil  to  a  minimum  the  legislature  had 
provided  for  party  enrollment,  but  the  closed  primary  made 
interparty  incursions  more  difficult  without  completely 
preventing  them.  Enrollment  frauds  were  now  added  to 
registration  frauds.  Thus  in  1912  in  the  first  precinct  of 
the  first  ward  in  Detroit  one  hundred  and  forty-six  men 
were  enrolled  at  three  addresses  with  no  sleeping  quarters 
at  any  of  them ;  and  in  wards  which  were  strongly  Dem- 
ocratic more  Republicans  were  enrolled  than  Democrats.81 
In  the  whole  city  of  Detroit,  which  at  that  time  had  a 
Democratic  mayor,  there  were  1 1 ,584  enrolled  Democrats 

60  The  following  table  gives  the  total  primary  vote  compared  with 
the  total  election  vote  in  percentages: 


1908 

1910 

1912 

1914 

Foreign-born  and  illiterate  counties  

so 

86 

60 

71 

Native-born  and  literate  counties  

2Q 

AA 

27 

16 

Rural  counties  

44. 

5^ 

4.1 

4.1 

Wayne  

-12 

58 

4.4 

76 

Kent  

4.4. 

6l 

•52 

62 

State  

39 

56 

40 

55 

61  Detroit  News,  August  23,  1912. 


IO4  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [540 

and  46,676  enrolled  Republicans.52  The  Republican  en- 
rollment in  Kent  County  in  1906  was  13,273,  the  party 
vote  in  that  year  being  10,638.  Likewise  in  1910  the 
enrollment  in  the  upper  peninsula  was  suspiciously  large.53 
On  the  other  hand  failure  to  enroll  in  some  cases  prevented 
voters  from  participating  in  the  primaries,  and  in  other 
cases  the  act  of  enrollment  seems  to  have  exhausted  the 
voter's  stock  of  party  interest. 

Where  Democrats  had  sufficient  individual  foresight  or 
where  they  were  controlled  by  skilled  manipulators  they 
enrolled  as  Republicans  and  voted  in  the  Republican  pri- 
maries. To  encourage  them  to  vote  in  their  own  primaries 
the  legislature  in  1911  amended  the  law  so  as  to  require  of 
each  party  as  a  condition  precedent  to  a  place  on  the  official 
ballot  a  vote  in  the  primary  equal  to  at  least  fifteen  per 
cent  of  its  membership.  The  increase  in  the  primary  vote 
of  the  Democrats  in  1912  and  the  decrease  in  the  vote  of 
their  opponents  is  suggestive  of  the  extent  to  which  the 
minority  party  had  interfered  in  the  internal  affairs  of  its 
opponent.  The  provision,  however,  was  unpopular  with 
Democrats,  and  enrollment  was  unpopular  with  the  voters 
of  both  parties.  Both  provisions  were  repealed  in  1913. 

The  motives  which  inspire  men  to  partisan  intermeddling 
are  not  always  calculated  and  evil.  Where  they  have  had 
no  contests  the  Democrats  have  never  had,  except  in  1912, 
any  reason  for  voting  in  their  own  primaries.  The  news- 
papers magnify  Republican  contests  until  they  appear  to  be 
much  more  than  merely  party  fights.  When  a  Republican 
nomination  is  practically  equivalent  to  election,  as  it  was 
in  the  State  and  in  many  counties  before  1912,  it  is  not 
surprising  that  Democrats  should  desire  to  participate  in 
making  the  nomination.54  The  effect  of  contests  on  inter- 

52  Detroit  News,  August  3,  1912;  Detroit  Free  Press,  August  26,  1912. 

88  It  was  58,135  (Detroit  News,  August  15,  1910). 

54  "There  is  no  question  but  that  hundreds  of  Democrats  voted  as 
Republicans,  in  order  to  nominate  one  man  and  defeat  another.  It  is 
stated,  and  authentically  we  believe,  that  in  a  neighboring  town  more 
Republican  votes  were  cast  for  a  certain  '  native  son '  than  the  commun- 
ity could  ever  assemble  on  election  day.  The  explanation  was  easy; 
scarcely  a  man  in  town  voted  as  a  Democrat,  the  colors  under  which  he 


54i] 


DIRECT   NOMINATIONS   IN   OPERATION 


105 


party  interference  is  suggested  by  a  comparison  of  the 
primary  vote  in  Ingham  and  Washtenaw  counties.65 
Ingham,  it  will  be  recalled,  is  a  Republican  county,  Wash- 
tenaw a  doubtful  county.  The  returns  show  that  in  the 
campaigns  of  1910,  1912,  and  1914  the  Democratic  vote 
was  much  larger  in  Washtenaw  than  in  Ingham,  and  that 
the  Republican  vote  in  the  same  campaigns,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  1912,  was  considerably  larger  in  Ingham  than  in 
Washtenaw.  The  divergence  in  the  two  counties  may  be 
explained  without  reference  to  interparty  interference. 
But  that  there  are  in  counties  like  Ingham  many  Democrats 
who  vote  in  the  Republican  primaries  is  well  known,  and  the 
extent  of  Democratic  interference  is  suggested  by  the 
percentages.  In  1912  the  Republican  vote  decreased  in 
Ingham  County  twenty-four  per  cent  and  in  Washtenaw 
County  fourteen  per  cent,  and  the  Democratic  vote  in- 
creased in  Ingham  County  eight  per  cent  and  in  Washtenaw 
County  five  per  cent.  This  is  about  what  we  should  expect 
if  more  Democrats  had  been  voting  as  Republicans  in 
Ingham  than  in  Washtenaw.  The  effect  of  the  repeal  of  the 
fifteen  per  cent  and  enrollment  provisions  was  to  encourage 
again  Democratic  participation  in  Republican  primaries. 
Accordingly  in  Ingham  County  the  Republican  vote  in- 
creased thirty-six  per  cent  in  1914  and  the  Democratic  vote 
decreased  five  per  cent;  in  Washtenaw  County  the  Repu fa- 
will  fly  next  November.  In  other  communities  Republicans  voted  as 
Democrats  to  help  nominate  personal  friends.  In  still  other  instances 
.  .  .  voters  absolutely  refused  to  go  to  the  primaries  because  they  would 
not  make  a  declaration  of  their  partisanship"  (Moon-Journal  [Battle 
Creek],  August  31,  1916). 

66  The  following  table  gives  in  percentages  the  primary  vote  as  com- 
pared with  the  party  membership  in  two  counties: 


Ingham 

Washtenaw 

Rep. 

Dem. 

Rep. 

l>em. 

1906 

18 
36 
66 
42 
78 

12 
10 
12 
20 
15 

26 

53 
57 
43 
47 

14 
4 
25 
30 

43 

IQ08  .  . 

IQIO.  . 

IQI2  .  . 

I9H  

IO6  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [542 

lican  vote  increased  only  four  per  cent  and  the  Democratic 
vote  actually  increased  thirteen  per  cent. 

On  referring  again  to  the  table  of  Republican  primary 
votes  on  page  100  it  will  be  noted  that  several  counties  have 
cast  more  votes  in  the  primary  than  they  have  in  the 
election.66  Ordinarily  this  condition  creates  a  suspicion  of 
Democratic  participation;  but  in  1912  it  was  caused  rather 
by  defection  in  the  election  than  by  an  abnormally  large 
vote  in  the  primary.  Kent  County  in  1910  and  1914  had  a 
favorite  son  who  aspired  to  the  governorship,  and  to  whose 
nomination  local  pride  contributed  a  vote  which  con- 
siderably exceeded  the  party  membership.  Chippewa 
County  paid  the  same  compliment  even  more  fulsomely  to 
its  favorite  son,  Mr.  Osborn.57 

In  1914  the  situation  in  Wayne  County  was  somewhat 
more  complicated.  In  that  county  there  were  two  rival 
favorite  sons.  Moreover  in  many  Detroit  precincts  there 
has  been  a  deliberate,  systematic,  and  thorough  control  of 
the  vote,  under  central  direction.  Rivalry  between  the 
Detroit  candidates,  together  with  local  pride  and  self- 
interest,  combined  to  call  out  an  exceptional  vote.  But 
neither  of  the  Detroit  candidates  won  the  nomination.  The 
successful  candidate,  Mr.  Osborn,  had  supported  Roosevelt 
in  1912;  and  accordingly  in  1914  the  regular  Republican 
leaders  in  Detroit  quietly  swung  their  vote  to  the  Demo- 
cratic candidate,  who  was  elected.  The  primary  vote  for 
governor  in  Wayne  County  was  47,334;  the  vote  for  Osborn 
in  the  election  was  only  21,483.  The  situation  in  Detroit 
appears  most  clearly  in  the  two  most  notorious  of  the  con- 
trolled precincts.  In  Billy  Boushaw's  precinct,  the  first 
precinct  of  the  first  ward,  the  primary  vote  for  governor  was : 
Republican,  265,  Democratic,  12;  the  election  vote  was: 
Republican,  I,  Democratic,  259.  In  Frank  Kibbler's 

66  The  same  occurred  in  local  direct  primaries.     See  note  49  above. 

67  The  following  table  shows  the  Republican  primary  vote  and  the 
Republican  party  membership  in  Chippewa  County  in  1910  and  1914: 

Republican  Republican  Party 

Year                                                      Primary  Vote  Membership 

1910 2740  2329 

1914 2913  2257 


543]  DIRECT   NOMINATIONS   IN   OPERATION  IO7 

precinct,  the  first  of  the  second  ward,  the  primary  vote  was: 
Republican,  166,  Democratic,  2;  the  election  vote  was: 
Republican,  38,  Democratic,  147.  Both  of  these  precincts 
gave  heavy  majorities  to  the  Republican  county  candidates. 
1  n  Boushaw's  precinct  practically  all  of  the  two  hundred  and 
sixty  odd  voters  not  only  split  their  tickets  in  the  election 
but  voted  differently  in  the  election  and  in  the  primary. 
What  appears  at  first  sight  as  the  independence  which  we 
associate  with  the  breaking  of  partisan  ties  and  the  splitting 
of  tickets  is  in  reality  the  antithesis  of  independence.68 

Democratic  participation  in  Republican  primaries  varies 
according  to  circumstances,  occurring  in  all  counties  which 
are  strongly  Republican  and  reaching  its  maximum  in  the 
controlled  precincts  of  Detroit.  Party  enrollment  was  not 
completely  effective  in  reducing  it.  The  fifteen  per  cent 
provision  in  the  year  in  which  it  was  in  effect  seems  to  have 
produced  the  expected  results  by  increasing  the  Democratic 
vote  and  reducing  the  Republican.  In  the  absolutely  open 
primary  of  1914  Democratic  participation  was  greater  than 
in  any  previous  primary  and  was  responsible  for  the 
nomination  of  a  minority  candidate  unpopular  in  his  own 
party.  The  provisions  for  partial  enrollment  enacted  in 
1915  did  not  eliminate  this  evil,69  and  party  interference  is 
probably  greater  than  under  the  convention  system. 

Nominations  and  Nominees.  —  A  nominating  system  deals 
with  human  not  mathematical  factors,  and  the  true  test  of 
the  machinery  is  found  in  the  character  of  its  product,  the 
nominee.  The  fundamental  questions  appear  to  be:  Are 
nominations  under  the  direct  primary  the  expression  of  the 
public  opinion  of  the  party?  Are  they  popular?  Is  the 
direct  primary  an  efficient  machine  for  the  expression  of  the 
popular  will,  and  can  the  machine  be  manipulated?  Two 
methods  of  manipulation  have  been  used  in  Michigan: 
participation  by  Democrats  in  Republican  primaries,  and 
the  putting  up  of  dummy  candidates  to  divide  the  vote  of 
the  majority.  The  first  method  of  manipulation,  the  pur- 


58  See  below,  page 

59  Detroit  Free  Press,  July  30,  1916.     See  above,  page  104,  note  54. 


IO8  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [544 

pose  of  which  is  to  nominate  favorite  sons  or  weak  or  un- 
popular candidates  in  the  Republican  party,  has  been  dis- 
cussed, and  will  again  be  referred  to.  In  Detroit  it  has  been 
systematically  and  effectively  used. 

How  far  the  multiplying  of  candidates  is  deliberately 
planned  to  divide  the  vote  of  the  majority  and  how  many 
candidates  are  dummy  candidates  is  problematical.  Minor- 
ity nominations,  however  brought  about,  are  contrary  to  the 
fundamental  principle  of  the  primary  and  constitute  a 
practical  danger.  When  there  have  been  only  two  candi- 
dates the  system  has  lacked  decisiveness;  but  when  there 
have  been  more  than  two  candidates  minority  nominations 
seem  to  be  the  general  result.  In  an  early  direct  primary 
for  mayor  of  Grand  Rapids  in  1904  the  winning  Republican 
received  2483  votes  out  of  7I34.60  In  the  Wayne  County 
primary  in  1905  the  successful  Republican  candidate  for 
sheriff  polled  only  18,513  votes  out  of  5O,496.61  In  the 
nomination  of  Grand  Rapids  city  officers  in  March,  1907, 
all  but  two  of  the  Republican  nominees  were  minority 
candidates.62  In  the  Republican  direct  primary  for  gover- 
nor in  1908  the  vote  was  as  follows:  Warner,  87,710; 
Bradley,  86,440;  Earle,  26,752.  Two  years  later  the  suc- 
cessful candidate  in  the  Republican  gubernatorial  primary 
polled  88,270  votes  out  of  191,328.  In  the  first  district 
congressional  primary  in  Detroit  in  1914  there  were  six 
Republican  candidates,  and  the  nominee  received  only 
4958  votes  out  of  a  total  of  20,036.  In  the  Republican 
primary  for  governor  in  the  same  year  there  were  five  can- 
didates; and  out  of  a  total  vote  of  202,175  a  vote  of  58,405 
sufficed  to  nominate.63 

80  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  March  16,  1905. 

81  Detroit  Tribune,  January  19,  1905. 

62  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  March  13,  1907. 

63  See  also  ibid.,  October  15,  1902.     "Gov.  Ferris  is  watching  the 
candidacy  of  Washington  Gardner  of  Albion.     He  admits  it,  and,  like 
other  Democrats  here,  avers  that  there  is  a  deep-laid  plot  among  the 
Republicans  to  get  enough  'dry'  candidates  in  early  to  try  to  persuade 
Lieut.-Gov.  Luren  D.  Dickinson,  of  Charlotte,  that  he  should  not  run, 
for  the  reason  that  the  '  dry '  vote  will  be  cut  up  to  such  an  extent  that 
Mr.   Dickinson  cannot  possibly  win"    (Detroit  News,   December  2, 


545]  DIRECT   NOMINATIONS   IN   OPERATION  ICK) 

In  support  of  their  contention  that  the  function  of  nomi- 
nation should  be  a  delegated  one,  politicians  point  to  the 
results  when  no  petitions  have  been  filed  and  the  voter 
is  required  to  write  in  the  name  of  his  choice  on  the  ballot. 
Thus  in  1906,  with  no  candidates  for  lieutenant-governor, 
the  Democrats  voted  for  224  different  men  for  the  nomina- 
tion, for  113  in  Wayne  County  alone.64  In  1910  the  Dem- 
ocrats voted  for  312  different  persons  for  lieutenant- 
governor.65  In  the  primary  of  that  year  Charles  E.  Town- 
send  was  nominated  by  the  Republicans  for  the  United 
States  Senate  and  by  the  Prohibitionists  for  the  state 
Senate.66  The  selection  of  delegates  to  county  conventions 
was  even  more  haphazard  and  ludicrous.  In  some  pre- 
cincts in  Kent  County  votes  were  cast  for  forty  different 
persons,  including  non-residents  of  the  State.  Some  men 
were  elected  delegates  in  two  wards  and  some  even  by  two 
parties.67  Nevertheless,  these  are  isolated  cases  and  are 
possibly  more  amusing  than  significant. 

As  to  the  character  of  nominees  under  the  new  system 
opinions  differ.  The  large  number  who  hold  that  nomina- 
tions have  been  worse  under  the  direct  primary  point  to  the 
fact  that  many  of  the  machine  politicians  who  were  con- 
spicuous under  the  old  regime  have  not  been  retired  from 
politics  under  the  new.  The  Republican  nominee  for  gov- 
ernor in  1908  had  served  for  two  terms,  and  his  unpopularity 
with  the  rank  and  file  of  his  party  is  indicated  by  the  fact 
that  in  the  election  he  ran  73,439  votes  behind  Taft  and 
66,062  votes  behind  the  state  ticket,  being  elected  by  the 
smallest  Republican  plurality  since  1890.  A  chairman  in  a 
rural  county  thinks  that  under  the  direct  primary  it  is  the 
"smooth  oily  guy"  who  gets  the  nomination.  A  Detroit 
newspaper  writer  of  long  experience  declares  that  the 

1915).  It  was  suspected  in  1916  that  Wesselius  entered  the  primary 
race  as  a  Sleeper  lieutenant,  and  that  Wesselius  campaigned  only  in 
Kent  and  Wayne  counties,  the  strongholds  of  Sleeper's  most  formidable 
rivals,  Diekema  and  Leland  (Detroit  Free  Press,  August  22,  1916). 

"Detroit  Free  Press,  June  21,  1906;  Official  canvass,  secretary  of 
state's  office. 

65  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  September  18,  1910. 

68  Ibid. 

87  Ibid.,  September  10,  1910. 


110  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [546 

system  brings  out  freakish  candidates, — men  with  strong 
personal  conceits  and  hobbies,  men  who  have  everything  to 
gain  and  nothing  to  lose.  A  Detroit  lawyer  who  led  in  the 
fight  for  the  direct  primary  a  decade  ago  but  whose  opinion 
of  it  has  undergone  a  change  with  a  demonstration  of  its 
workings,  observes  that  young  lawyers  enter  the  primary 
to  get  their  biographies  in  the  papers  and  their  names  in  the 
public  ear.  Frequently  such  an  irresponsible  adventurer, 
aided  by  luck,  is  nominated.  Thus  in  Detroit  in  1910 
Mayor  Breitmeyer  was  accidentally  defeated  for  a  Repub- 
lican renomination  by  one  Owens,  called  by  the  Municipal 
League  "a  poorly  educated  lawyer  with  a  poor  business." 
Owens  received  the  votes  of  Democrats  and  of  disgruntled 
Republicans  who  had  no  idea  of  nominating  him,  but  who 
aimed  to  discredit  and  embarrass  Mayor  Breitmeyer  by 
giving  his  opponent  a  substantial  vote.68  In  the  Detroit 
city  primaries  in  1912  nine  aldermen  who  were  under  indict- 
ment for  graft  were  renominated.  In  the  same  year,  if 
certain  Democrats  had  not  taken  the  initiative  and  circu- 
lated petitions  for  Mr.  Ferris  he  would  not  have  been 
nominated,  and  the  State  would  have  lost  the  services  of  an 
able  executive. 

Hostile  critics  of  direct  nominations  contend,  moreover, 
that  the  system  is  practically  unfitted  to  enlist  the  services 
of  the  best  men.  A  good  man  dislikes  to  conduct  a  personal 
campaign  involving  heavy  physical  and  financial  burdens 
and  disagreeable  controversy, — conditions  which  have  no 
terrors  for  the  young,  the  corrupt,  and  the  self-seeking.  It 
is  urged,  furthermore,  that  the  best  men  do  not  like  to  offer 
themselves  or  appear  to  offer  themselves  for  a  nomination, 
as  under  the  direct  primary  they  must  do.  They  prefer 
to  have  the  nomination  thrust  upon  them.69  The  conven- 
tion, representing  at  least  in  theory  the  unified  sentiment 

68  Many  voted  for  Owens  as  a  joke  (Detroit  News,  October  29, 
1910).     "Procter  K.  Owens  nominated  for  mayor  of  Detroit  on  the 
Republican  ticket.  .  .  .  The  primary  system  clearly  needs  some  very 
sober  thinking  from  the  people  of  this  state,  when  it  can  be  twisted  to 
such  ridiculous  uses  as  this"  (Editorial,  Detroit  Free  Press,  September 
8,  1910). 

69  Cf.  G.  Wallas,  The  Great  Society,  p.  319. 


547]  DIRECT  NOMINATIONS  IN  OPERATION  III 

of  the  party,  could  deliberately  select  a  man  to  meet  the 
peculiar  exigencies  of  the  time,  whereas  the  direct  primary 
must  wait  for  volunteers.  A  convention  might  be  bad ;  but 
it  does  not  necessarily  follow  that  its  nominations  were  bad. 
What  one  politician  said  to  me,  "I  have  seen  a  convention 
of  plug-uglies  make  a  splendid  nomination,"  was  a  truthful 
statement  of  what  frequently  occurred  in  the  workings  of 
party  tactics.  The  convention  issued  what  was  at  once  an 
invitation  and  a  command  of  the  whole  party  rather  than  of 
a  fraction  of  the  party,  a  call  to  service  and  leadership  which 
was  as  flattering  as  it  was  compelling.  In  the  fourth  con- 
gressional district  in  1912  the  Democrats  believed  that  a 
well-known  candidate  with  an  honorable  public  record 
would  be  able  to  defeat  Congressman  Hamilton.  Ac- 
cordingly they  asked  Judge  Yaple,  probably  the  strongest 
Democrat  in  the  district,  to  enter  the  primary  campaign. 
Judge  Yaple  was  old,  no  longer  inclined  to  seek  honors, 
particularly  in  rivalry  with  two  young  and  ambitious  fellow- 
Democrats,  and  he  therefore  declined  to  run.  Under  the 
convention  system,  it  is  argued,  Judge  Yaple  would  have 
been  nominated,  and  the  election  returns  show  that  he 
would  probably  have  been  elected. 

Nevertheless  there  are  many  who  believe  that  nomina- 
tions are  better.  They  maintain  that  public  officials  in 
general  are  of  a  higher  character,  that  graft  and  scandals 
have  become  infrequent  and  many  bosses  have  been 
retired,  and  that  since  the  death  of  Senator  McMillan  there 
has  been  no  dominant  state  machine.  In  the  senatorial 
primary  of  1910  Congressman  Townsend,  an  insurgent, 
was  opposed  to  Senator  Burrows,  a  reactionary.  Townsend 
was  nominated  by  a  decisive  majority,  carrying  even  the 
upper  peninsula  where  under  the  convention  system  the 
mining  interests  who  were  favorable  to  Burrows  had  ab- 
solutely dominated  the  situation.  On  the  whole,  however, 
the  balance  between  the  old  and  the  new  system  as  far  as 
the  character  of  nominees  is  concerned  appears  to  be  about 
even.  Under  each  system  there  have  been  nominations 


112  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [548 

good  or  bad  which  could  not  have  been  made  under  the 
other. 

Nominees  of  the  direct  primary,  however,  are  likely  to  be 
of  a  somewhat  different  type.  Nominations  apparently 
go  to  younger  men,  and  wealthy  candidates  seem  to  be  less 
frequent.  To  get  an  important  office  one  must  still  be  a 
man  of  means;  but  since  the  adoption  of  the  direct  primary 
there  have  been  no  millionaire  candidates  for  governor 
such  as  scandalized  the  State  in  1900  and  1902.  It  is  a 
moot  question  whether  the  direct  primary  gives  the  office- 
holder an  advantage  over  the  non-office-holder.  Many 
voters  in  the  primary  vote  only  for  a  name;  and  the  in- 
cumbent of  an  office  obtains  an  abundance  of  advertising 
and  has  an  opportunity  to  make  friends,  the  prime  asset  of 
the  office-seeker.  On  the  other  hand  where  the  feeling  is 
strong,  as  it  is  in  many  communities,  that  honors  should  be 
passed  around,  there  is  likely  to  be  a  distinct  prejudice 
against  the  office-holder.  The  city  candidate  is  likely  to 
win  over  the  rural  candidate,  and  in  general  the  cities  appear 
to  get  a  larger  share  of  the  county  nominations  than  they 
did  under  the  convention  system.  Although  there  are 
reports  in  some  counties  that  the  farmers  are  making  ob- 
jections, the  system  in  general  does  not  work  out  very 
inequitably.  In  many  counties  the  county  committees 
attempt  to  secure  a  satisfactory  apportionment  of  nomina- 
tions. In  some  counties  there  is  among  the  farmers  a 
prejudice  against  the  city  candidate  which  puts  him  at  a 
positive  disadvantage.  Moreover  when  it  becomes  known 
that  the  farmers  are  feeling  strongly  that  they  ought  to 
have  a  candidate,  some  one  is  likely  to  offer  himself  in 
response  to  the  demand.  In  certain  counties  it  is  a  tradition 
or  a  custom  that  the  sheriff,  the  register  of  deeds,  or  the 
clerk  should  be  a  man  from  the  country,  and  city  residents 
do  not  canvass  for  these  offices. 

In  some  parts  of  the  State  the  racial  complexion  of 
nominees  in  the  direct  primary  constitutes  a  difficult 
problem.  In  the  copper  country  there  was  said  to  be  in 
1910  a  triple  alliance  of  three  strong  groups  of  foreigners — 


549]  DIRECT  NOMINATIONS   IN  OPERATION 

the  Finns,  the  Austrians,  and  the  Italians — which  attempted 
to  parcel  out  nominations  among  these  races;  but  such 
action  from  the  party  standpoint  would  be  difficult  and 
from  the  public  standpoint  undesirable.  It  appears  to  be 
the  general  observation  that  nominations  in  the  upper 
peninsula  are  likely  to  go  to  the  racial  group  that  is  nu- 
merically strongest  and  that  this  condition  results  in  dis- 
satisfaction among  the  other  groups. 

Newspapers. — It  is  frequently  asserted  that  the  direct 
primary  has  increased  the  power  of  the  newspaper  to  in- 
fluence nominations.  Through  the  increased  use  of  adver- 
tising by  candidates  the  direct  primary  has  benefited  news- 
papers financially,  and  for  this  reason  it  has  been  asserted 
that  the  newspapers  favor  direct  nominations.  In  any 
event,  the  advertising  and  editorial  columns  are  more  in- 
fluential in  determining  nominations  than  they  were  form- 
erly. Although  the  direct  primary  has  made  the  newspaper 
a  more  important  medium  of  communication  between  the 
candidate  and  the  voter,  it  has  at  the  same  time  brought 
the  candidate  into  closer  personal  contact  with  the  voter. 
Where  this  personal  contact  is  closest,  as  in  local  campaigns, 
the  newspaper  has  least  influence;  where  the  personal 
contact  is  slight,  as  in  a  state  contest,  newspaper  influence 
is  at  its  maximum.  In  local  campaigns  observers  have 
remarked  that  the  press  has  seemed  to  lack  influence.70  On 
the  other  hand  a  poll  of  the  Republican  newspapers  in  1914 
as  to  their  choice  for  governor  showed  an  interesting  cor- 
respondence with  the  vote  cast  in  the  primary.71 

The  Effect  on  Party  Organizations. — The  effect  of  the 
direct  primary  on  party  committees  has  been  discussed  in 

70  Butterfield,  p.  19. 

71  The  following  table,  taken  from  the  Detroit  News  of  July  30,  1914, 
shows  this  correspondence: 

Newspapers  Vote  in 

Candidate  Favoring  Primary 

Osborn 104  58,405 

Martindale 78  47.942 

Groesbeck 37  43J37 

Gardner 14  Withdrew 

Ellis 10  22,248 

Linton 8  30,443 

8 


114  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN   MICHIGAN  [550 

the  preceding  chapter,  where  it  was  shown  that  in  the 
Republican  party  the  committees  find  themselves  with  a 
diminished  power  to  influence  nominations  and  to  manage 
campaigns.  This  condition  is  due  partly  to  statutory 
provisions  and  partly  to  the  nature  of  the  system.  The 
subject  which  will  be  considered  in  this  section  is  the 
general  effect  of  the  direct  primary  on  the  party  organization 
viewed  not  as  a  collection  of  committees  and  officials,  but 
as  a  vote-getting  and  vote-conserving  association  whose 
chief  desiderata  are  solidarity,  loyalty,  enthusiasm,  and 
discipline. 

It  is  possible  that  in  some  States  the  direct  primary  has 
strengthened  the  party  organization  by  reconciling  the 
members  of  the  party  to  the  leadership  of  those  whom  they 
believe  to  have  been  fairly  chosen,72  but  under  Michigan 
laws  it  has  not  had  this  effect.  A  member  of  the  Republican 
state  committee  says,  "There  are  two  things  which  hurt 
party  organization:  civil  service73  and  direct  primaries." 
If  the  direct  primary  is  unpopular  among  Republican  candi- 
dates, it  is  anathema  to  Republican  managers.  On  one 
indictment  they  agree:  it  hurts  or  weakens  the  organization. 
Among  those  who  admit  a  weakening  of  the  organization 
are  many  who  look  on  the  result  with  some  satisfaction  as 
being  due  to  the  emphasis  that  is  now  placed  on  men  rather 
than  parties.  At  the  other  extreme  are  those  who  fall  into 
the  error  common  to  party  managers  of  looking  on  the  party 
organization  as  an  end  in  itself.  It  will  not  be  necessary 
at  this  time  to  consider  these  divergent  opinions. 

Conventions,  in  which  under  the  old  system  party  life 
centered,  are  still  held  in  Michigan.  But  with  the  possible 
exception  of  delegate  conventions  held  in  presidential  years, 
there  are  no  opportunities  for  party  gatherings  the  character 
of  which  is  formal  and  public  enough  and  the  work  of  which 
is  vital  and  exciting  enough  to  attract  and  fire  the  active 
workers  of  the  party.  It  was  a  function  of  the  convention 

71  Proceedings  of  the  National  Conference  on  Practical  Reform  of 
Primary  Elections,  p.  20.     Speech  of  John  R.  Commons. 
7J  Cf.  H.  Croly,  The  Promise  of  American  Life,  p.  334. 


55l]  DIRECT  NOMINATIONS   IN   OPERATION  115 

to  fuse  party  factions  into  a  common  loyalty  and  to  animate 
the  mass  with  partisan  enthusiasm.  The  convention  was, 
besides,  a  supreme  disciplinary  court.  It  provided  an 
opportunity  for  the  compromising  of  differences,  so  that, 
however  fierce  its  factional  contests  may  have  been,  at  the 
end  of  its  sessions  it  presented  a  united  front  to  the  enemy. 
Of  course  the  manipulation  or  the  arbitrary  management  of 
conventions  might  create  or  intensify  factionalism;  but  a 
faction  rarely  made  head  or  attempted  to  make  head  against 
the  visible  and  imposing  authority  with  which  a  convention 
spoke.  Moreover  the  convention  was  potentially  a  de- 
liberative body,  although  it  is  true  that  it  rarely  realized 
to  the  full  its  potentiality.  It  had  many  resources.  It 
could  bargain  with  the  leaders  of  factions;  it  could  throw 
sops  to  the  disgruntled.  Above  all  it  could  develop  party 
strategy,  which  consists  in  nominating  a  farmer  when  the 
opposing  party  has  nominated  a  city  millionaire,  or  a 
German  when  the  opposition  has  ignored  the  Germans,  or 
a  man  of  talents  to  measure  up  to  a  strong  adversary  or  an 
unusual  emergency, — in  fact,  so  to  make  its  nominations  as 
to  appeal  to  the  maximum  number  of  elements  and  interests. 
The  direct  primary  is  unable  to  do  these  things  or  does 
them  blindly,  clumsily,  and  inadequately.  The  tendency 
under  the  convention  system  was  for  each  party  to  attempt 
to  seize  the  unguarded  points  in  the  field,  but  the  tendency 
under  the  direct  primary  is  for  both  parties  to  try  to  occupy 
the  same  space  at  the  same  time. 

The  direct  primary  gives  little  opportunity  for  com- 
promising or  smoothing  over  factional  differences,  but  on 
the  contrary  stimulates  factionalism.  For  a  period  ranging 
from  six  months  to  a  year  opposing  candidates  within  the 
party  engage  in  a  personal  campaign  of  cumulative  intensity 
culminating  only  two  months  before  the  election.  How 
wide  the  gap  between  factions  may  become  is  illustrated  in 
speeches  made  by  Mr.  Osborn  in  the  primary  campaign  of 
1910.  "  One  thing  I  do  not  believe  in,"  he  said,  "  is  political 
assessment  of  political  employes.  I  am  fighting  all  the 
400  employes  of  the  governor.  The  administration  is  as- 


Il6  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [552 

sessing  all  the  employes  it  can  control."74  And  he  said 
again:  "If  I  am  made  governor  I  will  put  out  of  office,  so 
far  as  possible,  all  the  dishonest  and  incompetent  appointees 
at  present  at  work."76  Here  within  the  ranks  of  a  party  we 
find  the  familiar  characteristics  of  a  struggle  between  parties : 
a  machine  consisting  of  public  officials,  the  assessment  of 
these  officials  to  pay  campaign  expenses,  and  a  promise — or, 
if  you  choose,  a  threat — of  a  redistribution  of  the  spoils. 
These  bitter  internal  struggles  destroy  the  physical  and 
moral  unity  of  the  party,  forfeit  the  loyalty  of  its  followers, 
sap  its  financial  resources,  and  give  to  the  opposition  a  fund 
of  unanswerable  campaign  arguments.  It  is  like  the  act  of 
a  country  torn  by  civil  conflict,  with  the  imminent  certainty 
of  a  foreign  war,  which  ships  the  contents  of  its  arsenals  and 
the  plans  of  its  fortifications  to  its  future  foe. 

If  there  were  primary  contests  in  both  parties,  the  weaken- 
ing effect  of  factionalism  would  be  equally  shared.  But  as 
it  is,  the  Democrats  have  never  had  a  contest  in  a  state 
primary.  With  a  selected  candidate  they  quietly  prepare 
for  the  general  election  while  the  Republicans  are  spending 
their  resources.76  In  1908  the  close  and  extremely  bitter 
primary  campaign  in  the  Republican  party  had  much  to  do 
with  the  poor  showing  made  by  the  Republican  nominee  in 
the  election.77  As  a  matter  of  fact,  as  we  have  seen, 
members  of  the  minority  party  are  much  more  than  com- 
placent spectators.  They  participate  in  the  Republican 
struggles,  often  with  the  deliberate  intention  of  nominating 
the  candidate  whom  they  can  most  easily  defeat.  The 
nomination  of  Osborn  in  1914  is  one  of  the  most  notorious 
cases.  The  chances  of  success  are  increased  when  candi- 
dates are  numerous,  for  then  a  small  body  of  voters  can 
determine  the  nominee.  Thus  in  the  congressional  primary 

74  Detroit  Free  Press,  September  3,  1910. 

75  Ibid.,  September  2,  1910. 

78  "The  Democratic  way  of  doing  things,  decidedly  improper  as  it 
seems,  gets  good  results  for  the  party,  while  the  Republican  adherence 
to  the  law  has  brought  demoralization  and  defeat"  (Editorial,  Detroit 
Free  Press,  July  26,  1916).  See  also  Gazette-Telegraph  (Kalamazoo), 
July  24,  27,  1916. 

"  Apparently  the  rule  is  that  the  primary  is  harmful  in  proportion 
to  the  interest  taken  in  it"  (Detroit  Free  Press,  April  24,  1916). 


553]  DIRECT   NOMINATIONS   IN   OPERATION  117 

in  the  first  district  in  1914  Doremus,  the  Democratic  con- 
gressman, had  no  opposition  for  the  nomination,  but  in  the 
Republican  party  there  were  six  candidates.  It  is  common 
knowledge  in  Detroit  that  the  Democrats  practically 
nominated  the  man  to  run  against  Doremus,  insuring  the 
latter's  election.  In  the  thirteenth  congressional  district, 
however,  which  is  the  northern  half  of  the  city  of  Detroit, 
there  were  fewer  Republican  candidates  in  the  primary  and 
the  Republican  nominee  won  in  the  election. 

As  a  matter  of  practical  politics  the  logical  outcome  would 
appear  to  be  that  the  Republican  and  the  Democratic 
bosses  would  make  terms  and  by  acting  together  control 
nominations  and  elections,  assigning  to  each  party  an 
equitable  share  of  the  offices.  In  Detroit  where  there  is  a 
large  controlled  vote  the  bipartisan  machine,  called  fa- 
miliarly the  "Vote-Swappers'  League,"  has  already  de- 
veloped, although  its  ramifications,  power,  and  personnel 
are  obscure,  and  it  is  impossible  to  attribute  its  development 
to  any  one  cause.  There  were  rumors  of  bipartisan  under- 
standings as  early  as  1901  ;  and  to  this  phenomenon  the 
foreign  voters,  the  saloon  influence,  the  disappearance  of 
distinctive  party  principles,  and  the  waning  strength  of 
party  ties  have  probably  contributed.  But  the  direct 
primary,  whether  it  is  or  is  not  responsible  for  the  phe- 
nomenon, has  clearly  provided  the  machine  with  a  most 
useful  instrument  of  manipulation.  Given  a  mass  of  con- 
trolled voters  in  a  few  precincts78  holding  the  balance  of 
power  in  the  city,  the  work  of  a  bipartisan  machine  is 
easier  under  the  direct  primary  than  under  the  convention 
system.  How  far  the  bipartisan  arrangement  has  extended 
is  largely  a  matter  of  guess.  It  has  appeared  to  control 
pretty  thoroughly  the  nominations  and  the  elections  in 
Wayne  County.  An  old  politician  asserts  that  it  has 
existed  in  other  counties  and  that  there  has  been  an  attempt 
to  extend  it  to  state  offices.79 


78  See  below,  page 

79  In  1916  the  Republican  and  the  Democratic  leaders  were  oppos- 
ing candidates  for  mayor,  and  in  appearance  the  two  party  machines 
were  no  longer  in  agreement. 


Il8  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [554 

The  weakening  of  the  Republican  organization  under 
direct  primaries  has  been  accompanied  by  a  relative 
strengthening  of  the  Democratic  organization.  The  Demo- 
cratic state  chairman  declared  in  1915  that  his  organization 
was  much  better  than  it  was  ten  years  ago ;  but  this  improve- 
ment may  be  ascribed  to  the  Democratic  success  in  1912 
which  followed  the  Republican  split.  Democratic  victory 
in  1914,  however,  can  be  attributed  in  great  part  to  the 
effect  of  the  direct  primary  on  the  Republican  organization. 
Contests  with  their  enervating  consequences  have  affected 
the  minority  party  little.  In  their  absence  the  Democratic 
organization  has  much  to  do  with  the  making  of  nomina- 
tions. With  power  and  responsibility  have  come  interest, 
activity,  and  stronger  men.  With  the  prevalence  of  minor- 
ity candidates  in  the  Republican  party  the  naming  of  the 
party  managers  by  these  candidates  has  the  effect  of  putting 
the  party  organization  in  the  hands  of  a  minority  of  the 
party,  and  has,  moreover,  produced  a  lack  of  continuity  in 
Republican  leadership;  in  the  Democratic  party,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  absence  of  contests  and  factions  has  fur- 
nished no  cause  for  the  unseating  of  managers,  and  con- 
tinuity in  management  has  contributed  to  party  strength. 
The  direct  primary,  therefore,  acts  to  some  degree  as  an 
equalizer  of  party  organizations,  shifting  its  burdens  on  the 
stronger  party  and  making  the  race  for  office  a  handicap 
race.  The  stimulation  and  the  strength  arising  from  unity, 
harmony,  the  saving  of  financial  resources,  the  development 
of  strategy,  secrecy  in  counsel,  and  continuity  in  manage- 
ment remain  in  the  minority  party  unimpaired. 

Recent  Working  of  the  Convention  System. — The  question 
is  relevant  whether  the  convention  system  would,  if  restored, 
work  as  badly  as  it  did  a  decade  ago;  but  the  question  has 
been  pretty  thoroughly  answered.  Michigan  has  retained 
conventions,  some  with  restricted  functions,  some  with  their 
functions  unimpaired.  In  the  Democratic  county  conven- 
tion in  Wayne  County  in  1907  the  committee  on  credentials 
arbitrarily  filled  vacancies,  and  a  motion  in  the  convention 
that  all  Democrats  present  be  declared  delegates  was 


555]  DIRECT   NOMINATIONS   IN   OPERATION  IIQ 

carried,  although  it  was  a  palpably  illegal  proceeding.80 
Contests  growing  out  of  this  convention,  as  well  as  contests 
arising  in  Wayne  County  in  the  effort  to  defeat  Mr.  Campau 
for  national  committeeman,  were  decided  by  the  state  con- 
vention in  the  old  way, — by  sheer  weight  of  numbers  and 
control  of  the  organization,  with  no  calm  consideration  of 
the  equities  of  the  cases.81  In  the  former  instance  both 
sides  were  represented  by  lawyers  and  were  provided  with 
affidavits;  but  nevertheless  the  result  was  a  foregone  con- 
clusion. Until  1916  the  pure  convention  system  has  been 
used  for  the  selection  of  delegates  to  national  conventions. 
The  Republican  state  convention  in  1912 — the  worst  in 
almost  every  respect  in  the  history  of  Michigan82 — illus- 
trates the  inherent  faults  of  the  convention  system,  its 
incapacity  to  adjudicate  vital  disputes  equitably,  and  the 
lack  of  provision  for  an  impartial  preliminary  organization 
and  an  impartial  presiding  officer.  The  absence  of  these 
essentials  and  the  impossibility  of  getting  them  turned  the 
gathering  into  a  mob  and  split  the  party. 

The  prenomination  campaign  and  the  primaries  which 
preceded  this  convention  are  equally  instructive.  The 
active  Taft  campaign  lasted  over  two  months.  During  this 
time  the  Taft  managers  collected  and  disbursed,  according 
to  the  sworn  testimony  of  the  man  who  had  charge  of  the 
finances,  the  sum  of  $i8,935,83  over  ten  times  the  amount 
spent  by  the  successful  Republican  candidate  for  governor 
in  the  1914  primaries.  This  sum,  moreover,  was  spent 
almost  entirely  in  five  congressional  districts.84  In  his  tes- 
timony before  the  Clapp  investigating  committee  Judge 
Murfin  of  Detroit  said:  "Mr.  Warren  asked  me  what  I 
thought  would  be  proper  to  be  expended  in  Wayne  County. 
I  told  them  they  could  not  spend  more  than  $2500.00  hon- 
estly. He  told  me  Mr.  McKay  wanted  about  $5000.00  in 

80  Detroit  Free  Press,  February  24,  1907. 

81  Ibid.,  February  15,  1907,  May  21,  1908. 

82  See  above,  page  85  ft. 

83  Campaign  Contributions,  vol.  i,  pp.  778-779.     The  Wilson  workers 
spent  about  $6500  (Detroit  News,  March  10,  1913). 

84  Campaign  Contributions,  vol.  i.,  p.  782. 


120  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [556 

this  one  before  he  started.  Then  I  said,  'You  are  going  to 
have  a  rotten  campaign,'  and  they  did."85  This  competent 
witness  declared  that  the  Taft-Roosevelt  primaries  in 
Detroit  were  "absolutely  the  rottenest  and  most  corrupt 
that  Michigan  has  ever  seen,  but  one  side  was  just  as  bad 
as  the  other.  Our  side  seemed  to  be  more  skillful  than  the 
other,  and  therefore  we  got  the  delegates."86  On  account 
of  legislative  enactments  there  was  no  control  except  that  of 
party  custom.  Accordingly  the  precinct  committeeman 
had  charge  of  the  booth  and  presided  over  the  ballot-boxes. 
"There  was  no  way  by  law  or  any  other  way  of  preventing  a 
Republican  or  Democrat  outside  of  the  precinct  from  voting 
if  he  wanted  to.  The  ward  committeeman  would  say, 
'You  can  vote,'  or  'You  can  not  vote."  87  When  he  saw 
fit  to  close  the  polls  the  committeeman  counted  the  votes 
and  made  out  the  credentials,  usually  to  himself  as  the 
delegate.  "What  they  did  was  simply  to  barter  for  these 
men  like  so  many  sheep.  They  would  go  to  one  man  and 
say,  'Here,  you  run  as  a  Roosevelt  delegate;  there  is  so 
much  in  it  for  you.'  And  this  man  would  say,  'All  right.' 
Some  of  them  took  money  from  both  sides."88 

The  Wilson-Harmon  primaries  in  Detroit  were  a  repeti- 
tion of  the  Taft-Roosevelt  primaries.  In  the  former  some 
of  the  ballot-boxes  were  kept  open  for  a  while  and  then 
closed  for  a  while  as  the  precinct  committeeman  judged 
expedient.  As  in  the  Republican  primaries  the  committee- 
man  usually  elected  himself  a  delegate.  "They  said  that 
this  had  been  the  custom  for  years."89  In  the  Democratic 
primaries  payment  was  made  with  petty  jobs  or  offices  to 
be  given  out  by  Republican  city  officials.  As  a  matter  of 
fact  practically  the  same  machine  was  engaged  in  manipu- 
lating both  primaries.  Grand  Rapids  was  under  direct 
primaries  from  1901  to  1908.  In  the  latter  year  a  decision 
of  the  supreme  court  necessitated  a  return  to  the  old 

85  Campaign  Contributions,  vol.  i,  p.  976. 
88  Ibid.,  p.  974. 

87  Ibid.,  p.  978.     Testimony  of  Judge  Murfin. 

88  Ibid.,  p.  980. 

89  Interview  with  a  Wilson  manager. 


557]  DIRECT   NOMINATIONS   IN   OPERATION  121 

system.  Immediately  following  the  primaries  the  Repub- 
lican city  convention  passed  a  unanimous  resolution  for  the 
reenactment  of  another  direct  nomination  law.90  The 
proposition  scarcely  needs  argument  that  under  the  strain 
of  contests  the  convention  system  is  as  unworkable  now  as 
it  was  a  decade  ago. 

A  return  to  the  convention  system,  although  desired  by 
many  politicians,  is  expected  by  few  and  seems  hardly 
within  the  range  of  possibilities.  As  one  of  them  expressed 
it,  "The  people  like  their  power  too  well.  They  have  had  a 
taste  of  blood,  and  they  won't  give  it  up."  If  the  question 
of  adopting  direct  nominations  were  submitted  again  to  a 
popular  referendum  it  would  carry  by  a  large  majority.91 

Tendencies, — The  preceding  discussion  may  now  be 
briefly  summarized.  Under  the  direct  primary,  conditions 
at  and  preceding  the  polling  show  few  of  the  disorderly, 
demoralizing,  and  corrupt  features  of  the  convention  system. 
The  prenomination  campaign  is  more  educational  in  char- 
acter and  makes  a  more  direct  and  personal  appeal  to  the 
voters.  For  state  candidates  it  is  less  expensive,  for  local 
candidates  more  expensive;  for  candidates  in  general  it  is 
more  disagreeable  and  more  burdensome.  The  average 
vote  in  the  direct  primary  is  better  than  in  the  old  primaries, 
and  shows  a  general  increase.  The  participation  of  Demo- 
crats in  Republican  primaries  is  more  serious  and  more 
systematic  than  under  the  convention  system  and  has  de- 
veloped into  an  effective  means  of  machine  control.  In  gen- 
eral, however,  means  of  manipulation  are  fewer.  Minority 
nominations  are  frequent,  and  the  character  of  nominees 
has  not  on  the  whole  improved,  although  it  has  in  some  par- 
ticulars changed.  The  direct  primary  tends  in  a  variety  of 
ways  to  weaken  the  majority  party  and  to  strengthen  re- 
latively the  minority  party.  Although  in  many  important 
respects  it  is  an  improvement  and  there  is  little  possibility 
of  its  abandonment,  the  direct  primary  can  not  yet  be 

90  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  March  19,  20,  1908. 

91  For  a  sweeping  condemnation  of  the  direct  primary  by  an  able 
Republican  politician  who  is  also  a  student  and  a  historian,  see  C.  Moore, 
History  of  Michigan,  vol.  i,  pp.  578-579. 


122  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [558 

considered  satisfactory.  An  indication  of  its  experimental 
status  is  found  in  the  absence  of  any  movement  to  extend 
it  to  the  important  judicial  and  other  state  officers  elected 
in  the  spring. 

A  tendency  which  we  have  already  noted  looks  to  the 
control  of  nominations  by  the  party  organization,  and  we 
have  seen  that  this  control  is  more  common  in  the  Demo- 
cratic than  in  the  Republican  party.  It  is  said  that  the 
Republican  state  leaders  attempted  to  hold  a  preprimary 
conference  in  1912  for  the  purpose  of  agreeing  upon  a  can- 
didate, but  objection  was  at  once  made  that  this  proceeding 
was  a  violation  of  the  spirit  of  the  direct  primary.  In 
Washtenaw  County  the  Democrats  have  held  a  mass-con- 
vention meeting  before  the  primary,  with  the  aim  of  stirring 
and  unifying  the  party.  They  have  had  a  good  speaker  so 
as  to  attract  Democrats,  and  have  talked  over  such  party 
problems  as  the  apportionment  of  nominations  around  the 
county. 

It  is  the  Republican  party,  however,  which  feels  most 
keenly  the  need  for  some  form  of  centralized  control.  In 
1914  the  Republican  state  central  committee  appointed  a 
subcommittee  on  revision  of  the  primary  law.  In  December 
the  subcommittee  made  its  report,  which  was  adopted  in 
full.92  This  report  is  of  value  for  the  reason  that  it  rep- 
resents the  matured  opinion  of  some  of  the  more  studious 
of  the  Republican  leaders,  formed  after  "state-wide  and 
nation-wide  investigations."93  The  committee  recognized 
two  "basic  causes  of  complaint":  (i)  "the  persistent  par- 
ticipation of  Democrats  and  other  hostile  partisans  in 
Republican  primaries  for  the  purpose  of  attempting  to 
nominate  weak  Republican  candidates  for  office;  (2)  the 
lack  of  opportunity  for  party  counsel  under  existing  primary 
law." 

The  plan  of  reform  suggested  by  the  report,  which  was 
limited  to  the  offices  of  governor,  lieutenant-governor, 

92  Detroit  Free  Press,  December  30,  1914. 

93  A  Petition  to  the  Michigan  Legislature,  Printed  by  the  Grand 
Rapids  Herald  (1914). 


559]  DIRECT   NOMINATIONS   IN   OPERATION  123 

secretary  of  state,  state  treasurer,  auditor-general,  attorney- 
general,  and  United  States  senator,  follows:  (i)  Biennial 
fall  conventions  shall  be  held  before  instead  of  after  the 
primary.  (2)  Delegates  to  the  "preprimary  state  conven- 
tion shall  be  selected  at  the  spring  election  on  petition  of 
from  two  to  four  per  cent  of  the  party  vote.  Delegates 
shall  be  apportioned  by  the  state  and  county  committees. 
No  county  conventions  are  to  intervene."  (3)  The  pre- 
primary state  convention  shall  meet  in  June.  It  will  adopt 
the  party  platform,  select  the  state  central  committee,  and 
choose  the  chairman  of  the  committee.  It  will  then  proceed 
to  consider  candidates  for  office.  "Here  will  come  the 
opportunity  for  party  counsel  and  party  argument  which  is 
vital  to  party  perpetuity  and  party  perpetuity  is  vital  to  a 
perpetuated  democracy."  (4)  If  a  candidate  receives  a 
majority  vote  in  the  convention,  his  name  will  be  certified 
to  the  secretary  of  state  for  a  place  on  the  primary  ballot. 
If  no  majority  is  secured  for  a  candidate,  there  will  be  no 
certification.  The  veto  power  on  all  nominations  will  rest 
with  the  party  electorate.  (5)  The  name  of  the  convention 
nominee  will  appear  in  the  first  place  on  the  primary  ballot. 
Other  names  may  be  put  on  the  ballot  on  petition  as  at 
present.  No  petition  shall  be  circulated  until  after  the 
preprimary  convention.  (6)  In  the  primary  there  shall  be 
separate  ballots.  When  the  voter  asks  for  his  ballot  a 
record  will  be  made  of  his  party  affiliation.  Party  enroll- 
ment was  considered  and  discarded  because  of  its  previous 
' '  unpopularity  and  impracticability. ' '  The  proposition  that 
a  candidate  who  receives  a  majority  of  all  votes  cast  shall 
be  declared  elected  was  discarded  as  of  doubtful  constitu- 
tionality. The  Democratic  and  Progressive  parties,  de- 
clared the  committee,  "have  almost  never  yet  gone  into  a 
state  primary  in  Michigan  without  some  sort  of  an  un- 
official conference  of  party  leaders  preceding  the  primary."94 
Out  of  fifty-three  legislators-elect  who  responded  to  inquiry 

94  In  1916  the  Democratic  state  central  committee  named  candidates 
for  governor,  lieutenant-governor,  and  United  States  senator,  who  were 
voted  on  in  the  primary.  After  their  nomination  all  three  candidates 
withdrew,  and  the  committee  filled  their  places. 


124  PARTY   ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN  [560 

blanks,  fifty-one  expressed  belief  that  the  primary  law 
should  be  changed,  and  thirty-three  favored  the  preprimary 
idea. 

Although  many  party  leaders  insist  that  the  preprimary 
convention,  legal  or  extralegal,  is  inevitable  for  all  parties, 
others  dismiss  the  idea  as  adding  one  more  complication  to 
an  already  complicated  situation.  They  say  that,  given  a 
legalized  preprimary  convention,  there  would  be  three 
campaigns  where  there  are  now  two:  one  for  the  convention, 
one  for  the  primary,  and  one  for  the  election.  This  added 
complication  would  make  conditions  intolerable  for  the 
candidate.95 

As  a  means  of  preventing  minority  nominations  and 
manipulation  by  putting  up  dummy  candidates  the  pref- 
erential ballot  has  been  suggested.  It  is  not  favored  by 
practical  politicians.  They  contend  that  at  a  time  when 
the  trend  in  politics  is  toward  simplification  the  preferential 
ballot  would  make  the  ballot  more  complicated — too 
complicated  for  many  electors  to  vote.  Accordingly  they 
believe  generally  that  a  shorter  ballot  would  lead  to  better 
nominations.  In  1910  a  Republican  voter  in  the  first 
precinct  of  the  first  ward  in  Detroit  was  asked  to  weigh  the 
merits  of  105  candidates  for  27  distinct  offices  ranging  from 
United  States  senator  and  governor  to  drain  commissioner 
and  constable,96  and  this  in  a  precinct  where  it  is  said  that 
seventy-five  per  cent  of  the  voters  are  assisted  in  the  mark- 
ing of  their  ballots. 

It  is  generally  believed  that  the  legal  limitation  of  primary 
expenses  has  effected  improvement.  Some  would  go  as 
far  as  to  prohibit  by  law  all  expenditure  in  a  primary 
campaign;  others  would  have  the  State  print  at  its  own 
expense  the  arguments  of  the  various  candidates.  Others 
maintain  that  the  fundamental  difficulty  is  the  same  as 
under  the  old  system.  As  one  county  chairman,  more 

96  The  Republican  state  central  committee  in  1916  again  recorded 
its  approval  of  the  preprimary  convention  idea  (Detroit  Free  Press, 
July  21,  1916). 

96  Detroit  News,  August  27,  1910. 


56 1  ]  DIRECT   NOMINATIONS   IN   OPERATION  125 

forceful  than  cultured,  expressed  it,  "The  great  trouble  is, 
the  high-brows  don't  vote." 

Effect  of  the  Direct  Primary  on  Conventions. — The  laws 
have  taken  away  functions  but  have  made  no  direct  change 
in  convention  organization  and  procedure.  There  is  natur- 
ally less  interest  in  conventions.  At  present,  according  to 
a  member  of  the  Republican  state  committee,  in  order  to 
get  delegates  to  attend  a  state  convention  the  executive 
committee  has  to  get  a  man  like  Root  or  Borah  to  deliver  a 
two-hour  speech.  County  conventions  have  tended  to 
become  cut-and-dried  affairs,  with  the  naming  of  delegates 
slated  in  advance  and  the  work  of  naming  the  slate  entrusted 
to  a  committee  appointed  by  the  chairman.  At  county 
conventions  there  is  an  absence  of  personal  workers.  The 
holding  of  all  county  conventions  on  the  same  day  did  away 
with  the  relay  system  in  the  election  of  delegates  by  which 
professional  workers  would  clean  up  one  county  and  then 
pass  on  to  the  next,  and  made  snap  conventions  impossible. 
Bribery  has  been  eliminated,  and  the  convention  has 
probably  become  more  representative.  To  those  who  are 
after  office  or  boodle  the  present-day  party  gathering  offers 
few  attractions.  There  is  less  tension  in  conventions  and 
there  are  fewer  struggles  over  credentials  and  preliminary 
organization.  Instructions  and  the  unit  rule — products  of 
close-fought  contests — have  become  less  common  in  both 
parties.  Conventions  tend  to  become  more  deliberative — 
in  so  far  as  anything  is  left  to  deliberate  over — and  there  is 
better  order.  On  the  other  hand,  the  attendance  of 
delegates  is  not  so  good.  Recent  Democratic  state  con- 
ventions, however,  have  been  unusually  well  attended, — 
another  indication  of  the  rejuvenation  of  the  party.  The 
1914  convention  had  delegates  present  from  eighty  counties 
and  a  total  attendance  of  about  twelve  hundred.97 

97  Detroit  News,  September  29,  30,  1914.  In  1914,  delegates  in  the 
Democratic  state  convention  were  apportioned  in  the  ratio  of  one  to 
every  one  hundred  Democratic  votes  for  secretary  of  state,  making  the 
unwieldy  total  of  1542,  of  which  239  were  from  Wayne  County  (Detroit 
News,  July  14,  1914).  The  Republican  state  convention  in  1914,  based 
on  a  decreased  party  vote,  had  1052  delegates. 


CHAPTER  VI 
CAMPAIGN  MANAGEMENT  AND  FINANCE 

The  Republican  party  with  its  superior  financial  resources 
usually  had  prior  to  1914  a  more  thorough  and  more  efficient 
campaign  organization  than  had  the  Democratic  party. 
The  Republican  organization  was  at  its  best  in  1896,  the 
Democratic  probably  in  1890  and  I9I4-1  Before  the  spring 
election  for  the  choosing  of  judicial  officials  there  has  been 
comparatively  little  campaigning;  and  in  the  off  years 
campaigns  have  been  much  less  vigorous  and  expensive 
than  in  presidential  years. 

Campaign  Organization. — In  the  prosecution  of  cam- 
paigns the  various  organizations,  state,  district,  and  county, 
have  had  to  cooperate,  although  their  relations  have  been 
determined  hardly  at  all  by  paper  arrangements,  but  rather 
by  the  organizing  ability  of  the  various  chairmen  or  secre- 
taries, by  the  nature  of  the  campaign — national,  state,  or 
local,  by  factions  within  the  party,  and  by  the  likes  and 
dislikes  of  the  managers.  Coordination  and  cooperation 
are  effected  by  advisory  committees,  by  visits,  by  banquets 
and  smokers,  by  personal  agents  and  emissaries,  and  by 
correspondence.  In  Wayne  County,  where  the  city,  county, 
and  congressional  committees  cover  practically  the  same 
field,  the  Republican  committees  have  usually  been  con- 
solidated, or  have  chosen  a  conference  committee  which 
has  apportioned  the  work  of  the  campaign  among  the  three 
bodies.  Thus  in  1900  the  Republican  conference  committee 
decided  that  the  county  committee  should  take  charge  of 
speakers,  halls,  and  literature,  the  city  committee  of  wit- 
nesses and  challengers  at  primaries  and  elections  and  the 
organization  of  extra  ward  and  township  clubs,  and  the 

1  I  have  not  observed  campaign  organization  in  1916  except  such  as 
made  itself  evident  before  September  I. 

126 


563]  CAMPAIGN  MANAGEMENT  AND   FINANCE  127 

congressional  committee  of  the  organization  of  the  first 
voters.2  Soon  after  the  nominating  conventions  joint 
meetings  of  committees  and  candidates  have  been  held; 
during  the  campaign  the  county  chairmen  have  kept  in 
close  touch  not  only  with  the  candidates  but  also  with  the 
ward  and  township  workers,  who  may  or  may  not  be  com- 
mitteemen;  the  state  chairman  confers  personally  or  by 
letter  with  the  county  chairmen  and  with  the  district 
members  of  the  state  committee ;  and  the  national  committee 
keeps  in  touch  with  state  conditions  through  the  national 
committeeman,  the  state  chairman,  or  special  agents. 

The  nominal  manager  of  the  state  campaign  is  the  chair- 
man of  the  state  central  committee,  but  during  the  nineties, 
it  is  said,  the  secretary  and  the  head  of  the  speakers'  bureau 
were  the  actual  directors  of  Republican  campaigns.  The 
Democratic  state  chairman  in  1890  and  1892  informs  me 
that  prior  to  those  years  the  state  chairman  had  been  a 
figurehead.  In  recent  campaigns  the  chairman  has  ap- 
peared to  be  the  real  directing  head  of  the  organization, 
although  in  both  parties  the  secretaries  have  been  ex- 
perienced and  valued  assistants  and  have  been  practically 
in  complete  charge  of  the  routine  work.  Besides  the 
executive  committee,  which  acts  as  a  convenient  and  time- 
saving  representative  of  the  full  committee,  each  party  has 
usually  had  a  speakers'  bureau,  a  literary  bureau,  a  treas- 
urer, an  assistant-secretary,  sometimes  a  finance  committee 
with  its  own  chairman,  and  sometimes  a  publicity  agent. 
The  state  central  committee  has  usually  met  two  or  three 
times  during  a  campaign  and  the  executive  committee  more 
often.  Prior  to  1900  the  State  League  of  Republican  Clubs 
assisted  to  some  extent  in  the  work  of  campaigns. 

The  county  committee  has  organized  less  formally  for 
campaigns,  but  politicians  have  always  recognized  the  vital 
importance  of  systematic  local  organization.  The  state 
chairman  has  usually  suggested  many  details,  but  the  county 
chairman  has  been  free  to  reject  or  modify  these  suggestions. 
At  present,  when  the  chairman  and  the  secretary  of  the 

2  Detroit  Tribune,  September  15,  19,  23,  1900. 


128  PARTY   ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN  [564 

county  committee  are  selected  by  the  candidates,  the 
latter  are  taking  a  more  active  part  in  campaign  manage- 
ment, and  the  committee  itself  tends  to  become  an  honorary 
rather  than  a  working  body.  In  most  cases  the  officers  of 
the  committee,  as  some  of  them  express  it,  are  the  "whole 
thing." 

Methods  of  local  campaign  management  vary  from  county 
to  county,  showing  in  some  cases  refreshing  and  effective 
originality.  A  record-breaking  Republican  majority  in 
Calhoun  County  in  1894  was  attributed  to  originality  in 
organization;3  a  Republican  defeat  in  Wayne  County  in 
1899  was  charged  to  the  unwise  selection  of  new  workers.4 
Like  the  state  secretary,  the  county  secretary,  who  attends 
to  the  office  work  at  headquarters,  has  usually  received  a 
monthly  stipend  during  the  campaign. 

In  the  district  campaign,  organizations  have  varied  even 
more  than  in  the  counties.  In  the  nineties  the  senatorial, 
the  congressional,  and  even  the  judicial  committee  often 
performed  important  campaign  functions.  The  present 
tendency,  however,  is  for  the  county  organization  to  manage 
the  campaign  not  only  of  the  county  candidates  but  also  of 
the  senatorial,  representative,  judicial,  and  congressional 
candidates.6  In  some  districts  the  congressional  committee 
makes  on  paper  an  impressive  appearance  of  dignity  and 
strength,  but  the  congressional  candidate  or  his  private 
secretary  usually  directs  the  fight.  There  is  little  connec- 
tion between  the  state  and  the  congressional  campaigns  and 
little  communication  between  the  two  organizations.  The 
township  committees  have  had  little  to  do  with  campaigns 
beyond  occasionally  reporting  to  the  county  chairman  on 
local  conditions  or  sending  in  lists  of  voters.  In  many 
cases  a  candidate  with  the  help  of  his  friends  and  his  ap- 
pointees conducts  his  fight  for  election  independently  of 
the  party  organization,  and  in  Wayne  County  campaign 
management  has  been  assumed  at  times  by  political  clubs. 

8  Detroit  Tribune,  November  9,  1894. 
4  Detroit  Free  Press,  April  4,  1899. 
6  Interviews. 


565]  CAMPAIGN  MANAGEMENT   AND   FINANCE  129 

Clubs. — Campaign  clubs  large  and  small  have  in  some 
campaigns  been  almost  as  numerous  as  the  ballot-boxes 
themselves.  Organized  early  in  the  campaign  and  in 
some  cases  retaining  a  semblance  of  life  between  campaigns, 
the  club  was  designed  to  enlist  young  men  in  party 
service,  to  stimulate  partisanship,  to  train  speakers,  and  to 
provide  an  organization  for  getting  out  the  vote  on  election 
day.  The  clubs  furnished  a  means  for  the  recognition  of 
racial  and  economic  groups  within  the  party,  gave  these 
groups  opportunity  for  expression,  and  incidentally  won 
their  adherence  by  stirring  their  pride.  In  the  late  eighties 
and  early  nineties  political  clubs  were  much  more  numerous 
and  more  carefully  organized  than  now  and  many  were 
ostensibly  permanent.6  As  a  rule,  however,  they  were 
organized  for  a  single  campaign  by  the  party  managers  or  by 
the  agents  of  "Leagues."  The  clubs  have  held  meetings 
and  even  distributed  literature ;  and  twenty  years  ago  ward 
clubs  in  the  large  cities  were  equipped  with  uniforms,  band 
instruments,  banners,  torches,  and  other  paraphernalia.  In 
1892  the  Republicans  were  particularly  active  in  club  or- 
ganization, and  in  1896  both  parties  attempted  to  enroll 
their  members  in  these  auxiliary  organizations.7 

For  the  campaign  of  1916  the  Republicans  early  organ- 
ized a  "  Hughes-for-President "  or  a  "  Hughes-and-Fair- 
banks"  club  in  every  county  in  the  State.  These  clubs 
took  over  the  management  of  the  presidential  campaign  in 
the  counties,  although  they  were  expected  to  cooperate 
with  the  county  committees.  These  clubs  seemed  neces- 
sary because  the  local  organizations  are  not  perfected  until 
after  the  state  primary,  at  least  two  months  too  late  to  do 
the  preliminary  work  of  a  presidential  contest.  In  the 
third  congressional  district  Republican  leaders  organized  a 
district  club  at  a  banquet  early  in  July,  and  appointed  an 
executive  committee  for  each  county  to  organize  county 

•In  the  spring  of  1916,  however,  it  was  reported  that  there  were 
fifty  Republican  clubs  in  the  State  (Detroit  Free  Press,  May  9,  1916). 

7  In  1896  the  "American  Honest  Money  League"  organized  about 
two  hundred  clubs  in  Michigan  (Detroit  Free  Press,  October  28,  1896). 

9 


130  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [566 

clubs.  Besides  the  executive  committees  the  district  club 
had  standing  committees  on  publicity,  on  speakers,  and  on 
arrangements.8 

In  1888  the  Michigan  Club,  a  strong  Republican  asso- 
ciation with  social  and  political  activities,  numbering  in  its 
membership  the  leading  local  and  state  politicians,  seems 
to  have  had  general  charge  of  the  Republican  campaign  in 
Wayne  County,9  and  in  1892  and  1896  it  assisted  the  local 
committees.10  Again,  in  1908,  1910,  and  1911  the  Wayne 
County  Republican  Club  managed  the  party  fight,11  and  in 
1908  the  Wayne  County  Bryan  Club  took  over  the  direction 
of  the  Democratic  campaign.12  In  Grand  Rapids  the 
Republican  Lincoln  Club  has  participated  in  campaigns. 
The  Business  Men's  Republican  Club  of  Wayne  County 
spent  $291.49  in  -  I9O4.13  In  1908  the  Wayne  County 
Republican  Club  began  the  organization  of  ward  and 
precinct  clubs  in  March,  and  in  November  had  one  hundred 
and  six  clubs  with  a  total  membership  of  12, 500."  College, 
Afro- American,  first  voters',  women's,  and  travelling  men's 
clubs  have  undertaken  special  phases  of  campaign  work. 

Although  one  of  the  main  purposes  of  the  club  has  been 
to  interest  the  young  voter,  this  method  of  recruiting  has 
not  been  neglected  by  the  regular  committees.  In  1896  the 
Republicans  held  a  mass-meeting  in  Detroit  for  the  first 
voters,15  and  in  1900  a  Republican  subcommittee  secured  the 
names  of  all  first  voters  in  Detroit,  about  seven  thousand.16 

The  party  manager  has  also  made  it  his  duty  to  see  that 
the  potential  voters  of  his  political  faith  become  qualified 
by  naturalization  and  registration.  Prior  to  1894  an  alien 
could  vote  provided  he  declared  six  months  before  the 

8  Detroit  Free  Press,  Mays,  1916;  Moon-Journal  (Battle  Creek), 
July  I,  1916. 

9  Detroit  Tribune,  October  5,  1888. 

10  Ibid.,  October  6,  1892. 

11  Detroit  Free  Press,  October  27,  November  18,  1908. 
2  Ibid.,  October  18,  1908. 

11  Detroit  Tribune,  January  27,  1905. 
14  Detroit  Free  Press,  November  18,  1908. 
16  Detroit  Tribune,  October  8,  1896. 
18  Ibid.,  September  25,  1900. 


567]  CAMPAIGN  MANAGEMENT  AND  FINANCE  131 

election  his  intention  to  become  a  citizen.17  At  that  time 
it  was  commonly  charged  that  the  naturalizing  officials 
made  it  easy  for  members  of  their  own  party  to  become 
citizens;18  and  committees  and  candidates  sometimes  offered 
free  naturalization  to  foreigners  who  would  promise  to  vote 
the  party  ticket.19  A  constitutional  amendment  adopted  in 
1894  required  full  naturalization  before  voting;20  but  this 
action  seems  merely  to  have  transferred  the  interest  of  the 
party  managers  from  the  declaration  of  intention  to  the 
final  papers  and  the  activity  of  the  managers  from  April  to 
October  without  lessening  much  the  evils  of  partisan  activity 
in  naturalization.21  A  later  law  provides  that  no  certificate 
of  naturalization  shall  be  granted  less  than  thirty  days 
before  a  general  election.  In  the  nineties  the  city  com- 
mittee, working  through  the  ward  and  precinct  organiza- 
tions, attempted  to  secure  full  registration  of  the  party 
members.22  At  the  present  time23  the  party  managers 
are  much  less  active  in  naturalization  and  registration  than 
formerly. 

Headquarters. — The  first  step  in  a  campaign  is  the 
opening  of  headquarters.  For  the  general  elections  both 
parties  have  usually  had  their  headquarters  at  Detroit,  and 
have  opened  their  central  offices  in  presidential  years  about 
the  first  of  August,  in  off  years  in  September.  For  the 
spring  election,  headquarters  when  established  have  usually 
been  at  Lansing.  At  headquarters  the  chairman,  the 
secretary,  and  the  heads  of  bureaus  spend  much  of  their 

17  In  the  light  of  this  law  the  activity  of  party  managers  in  naturali- 
zation is  shown  by  the  following  figures  of  naturalization  in  Detroit  in 
1886:  January,  17;  February,  36;  March,  no;  April,  312;  May,  106. 
In  1885,  an  off  year,  290  were  naturalized;  in  1886,  a  regular  election 
year,  660  were  naturalized  up  to  August  15  (Detroit  Tribune,  August  15, 
1886).     On  March  31,  1892,  74  declarations  of  intention  were  filed  in 
Detroit  (ibid.,  April  2,  1892). 

18  Detroit  Tribune,  August  15,  October  29,  1886. 

19  Ibid.,  October  30,  1890,  July  i,  1892,  March  20,  1895,  November 
15,  1896. 

20  Michigan  Manual,  1895,  p.  454. 

21  Detroit  Tribune,  March  20,  1895,  November  14,  15,  1896,  October 
14,  1900,  October  18,  1904. 

22  Ibid.,  October  24,  1886,  October  28,  1892,  October  7,  1896,  Sep- 
tember 27,  1900;  Detroit  Free  Press,  March  4,  1899. 

23  September  I,  1916. 


132  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [568 

time,  and  they  are  assisted  by  a  force  of  stenographers  and 
helpers, — a  force,  however,  which  is  smaller  now  than  in  the 
campaigns  of  the  nineties.  About  a  month  after  the 
opening  of  state  headquarters  the  county  committees 
establish  their  offices,  usually  at  the  county-seats. 

On  the  relative  merits  of  long  and  short  campaigns  poli- 
ticians entertain  different  opinions.  For  state  offices  the 
speaking  campaign  has  usually  lasted  a  month  or  a  month 
and  a  half ;  for  county  offices  about  a  month ;  for  city  offices 
a  still  shorter  time;  and  for  township  offices  there  is  no 
formal  campaign  at  all.  In  general  the  tendency  seems 
to  be  toward  the  short  campaign. 

Lists  of  Voters. — Lists  of  voters  are  indispensable  to  the 
campaign  manager  in  distributing  literature  and  in  getting 
out  the  vote,  and  such  lists  possess  additional  value  if  they 
show  the  voters'  party  affiliations.  Between  1906  and 
1913  enrollment  for  the  direct  primary  furnished  a  list  of 
party  members,  and  some  believe  that  one  of  the  purposes 
of  party  enrollment  was  the  providing  of  these  lists.  City 
directories,  registration  books,  and  poll-lists  are  useful; 
precinct  workers  and  local  committeemen  send  in  names; 
possibly  census  enumerators24  and  rural  and  city  mail 
carriers  contribute  lists  of  names,  although  political  activity 
on  their  part  is  prohibited  by  law;  and  names  are  secured 
in  other  ways  which  managers  refuse  to  divulge.  Most 
valuable  and  most  difficult  to  obtain  is  a  list  of  doubtful 
voters;  but  since  1912  party  managers  have  been  inclined 
to  look  on  most  voters  as  doubtful,  and  some  have  discon- 
tinued attempts  at  classification.  One  Democratic  county 
chairman  possesses  typewritten  lists  of  Democrats,  Repub- 
licans, doubtful  voters,  and  first  voters,  arranged  alpha- 
betically and  by  rural  routes,  originally  secured  twenty 
years  ago  by  a  house-to-house  canvass  and  kept  up  to  date 
by  comparison  with  the  registration  books  and  poll-lists. 
In  1910  the  Republican  state  committee  adopted  an  expen- 
sive card  index  system.25 

24  Detroit  Free  Press,  May  31,  1890. 
26  Detroit  News,  August  21,  1910. 


569]  CAMPAIGN  MANAGEMENT  AND  FINANCE  133 

The  Campaign  Fund. — In  keeping  his  war-chest  supplied 
the  manager  has  found  not  always  agreeable  but  constant 
and  serious  employment.  In  general  the  national,  state, 
and  county  organizations  have  been  financially  independent 
but  have  helped  one  another  when  help  has  been  needed  and 
where  it  has  been  possible  to  give  it.  In  general  the  com- 
mittees have  usually  raised  all  they  could  and  spent  all  they 
raised — often  more. 

The  question  of  who  should  solicit  contributions  has 
depended  on  the  men  and  on  the  circumstances.  On  the 
shoulders  of  the  state  chairman  has  generally  rested  most 
of  the  burden  of  getting  the  state  fund,26  but  he  has  been 
assisted  by  the  district  members  of  the  state  committee,  by 
the  treasurer,  and  sometimes  by  a  special  subcommittee  on 
finance.  Wayne  County  has  always  contributed  a  major 
part  of  the  campaign  funds  of  both  parties.  The  treasurer 
has  usually  been  a  wealthy  business  man  or  banker  of 
Detroit,  selected  on  account  of  his  business  ability,  his 
willingness  to  contribute,  and  his  financial  standing  and 
connections.  Aside  from  soliciting  contributions,  his  duties 
may  be  summed  up  in  the  words  of  a  Republican  treasurer : 
"I  acted  the  same  as  the  teller  in  a  bank  would  and  when- 
ever a  voucher  which  was  properly  endorsed  was  presented 
for  payment,  I  paid  it."27  In  the  counties  contributions 
have  usually  been  solicited  by  the  chairman,  assisted  by  a 
subcommittee  on  finance.  Prior  to  1908,  according  to  a 
Republican  campaign  manager  of  the  nineties,  the  Repub- 
lican national  committee  had  asked  individuals  for  money 
but  had  never  circulated  "broadcast  appeals"  within  the 
State;  in  1896,  for  example,  Hanna  had  a  special  agent  in 
the  State  raising  funds  and  reporting  on  conditions.  In 
1908,  however,  the  national  committee  solicited  funds  in 
the  State,  and,  on  account  of  this  "crossing  of  the  wires," 
the  state  committee  asked  for  help  from  the  national  or- 
ganization and  got  it.28  The  state  organization,  however, 
had  received  considerable  assistance  from  the  national 

26  Detroit  Tribune,  March  6,  1901. 

27  Detroit  Free  Press,  August  29,  1908. 

28  Ibid.,  November  3,  1908. 


134  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [570 

committee  in  1896  and  was  given  a  donation  of  ten  thousand 
dollars  in  1900,  but  in  1904  Michigan  financed  itself.  The 
Democrats  received  help  in  1892  and  1908  but  shifted  for 
themselves  in  1912.  County  committees  have  frequently 
contributed  to  the  state  and  even  to  the  national  fund.29 

The  principal  sources  of  campaign  funds  have  been  the 
following:  assessments  levied  on  candidates  and  on  office- 
holders, contributions  from  individuals  and  from  corpora- 
tions, collections  and  subscriptions  at  conventions  and  public 
meetings,  and  donations  from  party  committees  and  clubs. 

The  assessment  of  candidates  either  by  formal  action  or 
by  tacit  understanding  has  been  a  uniform  practice  in  both 
parties.  Assessments  have  usually  been  fixed  early  in  the 
campaign  by  committee  members  in  consultation  with  the 
candidates.  Although  assessments  were  in  no  way  com- 
pulsory and  were  not  always  paid  in  full,  they  amounted 
in  many  cases  to  a  large  part  of  the  emoluments  of  the  office 
sought,  and  the  obligation  of  paying  the  assessment  has 
probably  deterred  many  men  of  limited  means  from  accept- 
ing nomination.30  There  has  been  no  invariable  rule  in 
either  party  for  the  fixing  of  these  assessments.31  Repub- 
lican candidates  for  governor  have  usually  paid  at  least  one 
thousand  dollars  and  frequently  much  more;32  congressional 
candidates,  five  hundred  dollars;33  and  other  candidates  on 
the  state  ticket  from  seventy-five  to  five  hundred  dollars 
according  to  their  means  and  expectations.34  Democratic 
assessments  have  been  less  fruitful  than  Republican  because 
Democratic  candidates  as  a  rule  have  not  been  wealthy  men 
nor  have  they  been  hopeful  of  election.35 

29  Report  of  the  Treasurer,  Democratic  National  Committee,  1912, 
p.  30. 

30  82  Mich.  Reports,  p.  532. 

31  "The  candidates  were  assessed  all  that  the  traffic  would  bear," 
says  an  ex-treasurer. 

82  Detroit  Tribune,  August  2,  December  I,  1900;  Detroit  Free  Press, 
August  27,  1908.  A  Democratic  campaign  manager  informs  me  that 
the  customary  assessment  of  the  candidate  for  governor  was  $2000. 

33  Detroit  Tribune,  October  5,  1898,  August  2,  1900. 

34  Statements  filed  with  secretary  of  state,   1892-1900,  and  with 
Wayne  County  clerk,  1914. 

"  In  1900  the  Democratic  central  committeemen  assessed  themselves 
fifty  dollars  each  (Detroit  Tribune,  August  16,  1900). 


57i] 


CAMPAIGN  MANAGEMENT  AND  FINANCE 


135 


For  the  county  campaign  fund,  the  bulk  of  which  is 
provided  by  the  assessment  of  candidates,  a  definite  rate  is 
often  fixed  by  agreement,  varying  in  different  counties  from 
seven  to  ten  per  cent  of  the  emoluments  of  the  office  during 
the  preceding  year.36  In  some  counties  it  has  been  the 
custom  to  estimate  carefully  the  total  cost  of  the  county 
campaign  and  then  apportion  the  burden  among  the  can- 
didates in  proportion  to  the  monetary  value  of  the  office 
sought.37  Usually  the  candidate  for  sheriff  has  paid  the 
largest  assessment;  township  candidates  have  rarely  been 
assessed  at  all.  Congressional,  senatorial,  representative, 
and  judicial  candidates  have  usually  made  appropriate 
contributions  to  the  county  fund.  In  Wayne  County  in 
1898  the  ten  per  cent  plan  was  expected  to  provide  the 
Republicans  with  a  fund  of  $3890.  The  Ingham  County 
Republican  committee  collected  in  1914  $2178,  of  which 
$1685  came  from  the  candidates.38  In  the  counties  assess- 
ments appear  in  general  to  be  lower  than  they  were  early  in 
the  nineties  but  somewhat  higher  than  they  were  a  decade 
ago.39 

A  quarter  of  a  century  ago  the  assessment  of  office- 
holders was  a  recognized  and  ordinary  method  of  raising 

38  Detroit  Tribune,  October  14,  1898. 

*7  This  has  been  the  Republican  custom  in  Calhoun  County.  In 
Ionia  County  in  1914  the  Republican  candidates  paid  their  ten  per 
cent  assessment  in  installments  of  five,  two  and  one  half,  and  two  and 
one  half. 

18  The  following  table  shows  the  assessments  paid  by  various  Repub- 
lican county  candidates: 


Office 

Wayne,  1898 

Kent,  1914 

Ingham, 
1914 

Livingston, 
1914 

Sheriff  

75O 

•*oo 

2OO 

IOO 

Treasurer  

5OO 

2OO 

1715 

TOO 

Prosecuting  Attorney  

5OO 

280 

175 

IOO 

Register  of  Deeds  

•*5O 

75 

^5O 

Auditor  

•^50 

28 



Clerk  

35O 

2OO 

175 

5O 

Court  Commissioner  

•*oo 

60 

25 

25 

Coroner  

120 

120 

25 

"Says  a  county  chairman  (1915):  "My  assessment  nine  years  ago 
for  county  clerk  was  thirty  dollars:  two  years  ago  it  was  two  hundred 
dollars." 


136  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [572 

funds.40  The  system  of  requisitions  extended  from  the 
customs  collectors  and  postmasters  to  the  elevator  boys  and 
scrub-women.  Civil  service  reform  limited  to  some  extent 
this  method  of  financing  but  did  not  prevent  voluntary  con- 
tributions;41 these,  of  course,  continued  to  be  solicited  from 
state,  county,  and  city  officials  and  employes,  money  from 
these  sources  comprising  a  considerable  proportion  of  the 
total  fund.42  In  1908  President  Roosevelt  dismissed  one  of 
the  most  prominent  of  the  local  Republican  bosses  from  a 
customs  collectorship  for  permitting  the  political  assessment 
of  his  employes,43  but  during  the  same  year  the  officials 
and  employes  at  the  state  capital  paid  assessments  amount- 
ing in  some  cases  to  two  per  cent  of  their  salaries.44 

With  respect  to  voluntary  contributions  from  individuals 
the  Republicans  have  been  more  fortunate  than  the  Dem- 
ocrats. Most  men  of  wealth,  especially  since  1896,  have 
been  Republicans,  partly  because  the  fiscal  policies  of  the 
Republican  party  have  appeared  to  be  favorable  to  business. 
Individual  contributions  have  been  secured  by  personal 
solicitation  or  by  letter,  and  in  this  work  the  chairman,  the 
secretary,  the  treasurer,  the  finance  committee — if  there  is 
one — and  the  district  members  of  the  central  committee 
have  cooperated.  Campaign  contributions,  it  is  needless 

40  Dilla,  p.  167;  H.  Welsh,  "Campaign  Committees:  Publicity  as  a 
Cure  for  Corruption,"  in  Forum,  vol.  xiv,  pp.  26-38;  Detroit  Tribune, 
September  I,  1890,  March  3,  1891,  October  27,  1892,  October  3,  1896; 
Detroit  Free  Press,  September  17,  1896. 

41  22  Stat.  L.,  p.  406;  Detroit  Tribune,  July  25,  November  3,  1898; 
Detroit  Free  Press,  September  18,  1896.     As  a  Democratic  politician 
of  Detroit  expressed  it  in  1912:    "They  come  down  here  to  get  soft 
places  and  it's  only  reasonable  to  expect  that  they  should  help  out  on 
the  campaign  expenses"  (Detroit  News,  September  12,  1912).     A  very 
large  number  of  women  contributed  to  the  Ingham  County  Republican 
campaign  fund  in  1914,  and  the  county  chairman  explained  that  they 
were  employes  at  the  capitol. 

42  Detroit  Free  Press,  March  23,   1899,  October  7,   1908;  Detroit 
Tribune,  August  24,  October  15,  1900,  September  20,  1902. 

43  Lincoln  Avery  of  Port  Huron  (Detroit  Free  Press,  October  3,  1908). 

44  Ibid.,  August  27,  October  16,   1908.     Says  one  Republican  ex- 
treasurer:    "City  and    county  employes  were  probably  not  formally 
assessed.     Neither  were  state  employes.     But  a  paper  was  circulated 
and   they   were   expected   to  contribute."     Another   Republican   ex- 
treasurer  says:   "State  employes  have  always  been  assessed  a  reason- 
able amount  by  the  state  central  committee.     The  city  and  county 
office-holders  and  employes  have  always  been  assessed  up  to  the  limit." 


573]  CAMPAIGN  MANAGEMENT  AND  FINANCE  137 

to  say,  are  not  always  matters  of  detached  philanthropy  or 
party  patriotism.  The  composition  of  committees,  ap- 
pointments to  honorary  party  offices,  and  the  making  of 
nominations  have  often  been  determined,  especially  prior 
to  the  introduction  of  direct  nominations,  by  the  possibility 
of  securing  direct  or  indirect  campaign  contributions.  A 
man  was  sometimes  approached  and  told  that  if  he  would 
accept  a  nomination  his  campaign  would  be  financed.  In 
the  case  of  legislative  candidates  this  form  of  bribery  was 
said  to  be  common,  and  it  was  believed  that  candidates  for 
United  States  senator  ordinarily  paid  the  expenses  of 
legislative  candidates.46 

Many  contributions,  moreover,  were  made  with  the  ex- 
pectation of  receiving  legislative  or  administrative  favors. 
Nevertheless,  twenty-five  years  ago  the  sense  of  party 
fealty  was  stronger  than  it  is  now,  and  the  obligation  to 
contribute  according  to  one's  means  was  more  generally 
recognized  by  wealthy  men.46  In  1886  the  leader  of  the 
Democrats  started  the  campaign  fund  with  a  contribution 
of  five  thousand  dollars,47  and  in  the  majority  party  the 
contributions  were  larger;48  but  in  1912  and  1914  the  largest 
Republican  contribution  was  one  thousand  dollars.49  The 
party  treasury  is  subject  to  those  influences  which  affect 
party  strength  at  the  polls.  In  1908  the  Democrats  had 
great  difficulty  in  getting  contributions,  but  there  were 
three  or  four  times  as  many  contributors  to  the  Republican 
fund  as  ever  before.50  Before  1904  the  party  managers 
seldom  made  public  appeals  for  contributions;  the  small 
donation  was  rarely  sought  or  received,  and  even  since 

45  The  Ingham  County  grand  jury  reported  in  1908  that  the  payment 
by  senatorial  candidates  of  the  election  expenses  of  candidates  for  the 
legislature  was  a  "very  common  practice"  (Lansing  State  Republican, 
March  16,  1908).     In  a  conversation  which  I  had  with  Ex-senator 
Burrows  shortly  before  his  death,  he  stated  that  he  had  never  assisted 
legislative  candidates  in  their  campaigns. 

46  Detroit  Free  Press,  September  2,  1908. 

47  Ibid.,  August  20,  1886. 

48  Ibid.,  November  3,  1908. 

49  Detroit  News,  October   16,  1912.     Statement  for  1914  in  Ionia 
County  clerk's  office. 

50  Detroit  Free  Press,  November  3,  1908. 


138  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [574 

1904  it  has  been  emphasized  chiefly  by  the  Democrats.51 
In  1908,  an  exceptionally  good  year  for  the  Republicans, 
the  party  had  about  five  hundred  individual  contributions, 
but  in  1914  it  had  only  sixty-three.  In  that  year  of  topsy- 
turvy politics  the  Democrats  had  more  than  1925  contrib- 
utors, 957  of  whom  gave  one  dollar  or  less.52  It  seems 
impossible  to  secure  definite  information  in  regard  to  cor- 
poration contributions,  but  it  is  probable  that  corporations 
gave  substantial  amounts  to  both  parties.  The  Michigan 
Central  Railroad  was  in  this  respect  most  generous.63 

Prior  to  1913  there  was  no  intelligent  or  effective  legis- 
lation on  party  finances.  The  law  of  1891  prohibited  any 
contribution  of  money  for  any  purpose  except  to  defray 
the  expenses  of  printing  and  circulating  handbills  and  other 
papers  or  to  convey  sick  or  infirm  electors  to  the  polls,54 — 
provisions  which  had  the  effect,  not  of  preventing  other 
expenditures  or  contributions  for  other  expenditures,  but  of 
forcing  the  party  managers  to  enter  all  receipts  and  dis- 
bursements under  the  head  of  printing  and  circulating 
documents.55  The  legislature  of  1893  greatly  extended  the 
list  of  permissible  expenses,  and  made  it  illegal  to  contribute 
money  for  other  purposes  than  to  defray  these  expenses. 
These  laws  had  little  if  any  effect  on  contributions. 

From  the  presidential  campaign  of  1904  resulted  an 
aroused  public  interest  in  campaign  finance,  and  Democrats 
and  reforming  Republicans  demanded  publicity.  At  the 
close  of  the  campaigns  of  1904  and  1908  the  chairman  of 
the  Democratic  state  committee  prepared  a  statement  of 
receipts  and  disbursements  and  sent  it  to  members  of  the 
central  committee,  to  contributors,  and  to  candidates;56 

61  Detroit  Free  Press,  August  3,  1906. 

62  Statement  in  Ingham  County  clerk's  office. 

M  Detroit  Free  Press,  September  13,  i9o6;.Detroit  Tribune,  May  29, 
1902. 

64  Public  Acts,  1891,  No.  190. 

55  Senate  Journal,  1893,  pp.  49-50. 

"Free  Press,  April  12,  1908.  In  1908  the  Democratic  national 
committee  had  taken  advanced  ground,  resolving  to  accept  no  contri- 
butions from  corporations  and  none  above  ten  thousand  dollars,  to 
publish  before  the  election  all  above  one  hundred  dollars,  and  to  accept 
none  above  one  hundred  dollars  within  three  days  of  the  election 
(Democratic  National  Convention  Proceedings,  1908,  pp.  368-373). 


575]  CAMPAIGN  MANAGEMENT  AND  FINANCE  139 

but  in  both  campaigns  the  Republicans  refused  to  publish 
the  names  of  their  contributors.  In  1912,  candidates 
promised  legislation  on  the  subject  of  campaign  finance  ;57 
and  for  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  Michigan,  party 
officials  published  the  names  of  campaign  contributors,  this 
action  being  taken  at  intervals  during  the  campaign  by  the 
Progressives  and  by  the  Democrats.68 

The  corrupt  practice  act  of  I9I3,59  now  in  force,  provides 
for  the  filing  of  sworn  and  itemized  statements  of  con- 
tributions ;  prohibits  the  giving  of  a  campaign  contribution 
to  any  person  not  a  candidate  or  a  member  of  a  political 
committee;  forbids  the  giving,  accepting,  or  accounting  of 
any  gift  in  the  name  of  any  person  not  actually  supplying 
the  money;  makes  anonymous  contributions  unlawful; 
and  declares  corporation  contributions  in  any  form  or  in 
any  manner  illegal.  Contributions  are  still  received  from 
individuals  connected  with  corporations,  and  it  is  believed 
that  they  have  the  same  intent  and  effect  as  when  made  in 
the  name  of  the  corporation.  Michigan  legislation  has  not 
put  any  limit  to  the  amount  of  individual  contributions. 
Money  has  been  raised  to  some  extent  by  collections  and 
subscriptions  at  conventions  and  public  meetings,  a  Dem- 
ocratic state  convention  in  1912  subscribing  fifteen 
hundred  dollars60  and  a  Progressive  state  convention  in 
1913  forty-two  hundred  dollars.61 

Data  for  estimating  the  total  expenditure  in  campaigns 
are  from  the  nature  of  the  case  unsatisfactory.  It  is  true 
that  the  general  election  law  of  1891  provided  that  state- 
ments of  expenditure  should  be  filed  within  twenty  days 
after  the  election  by  the  chairmen  of  committees  and  by 
candidates,  those  within  the  county  with  the  county  clerk 
and  those  in  political  divisions  larger  than  counties  with  the 
secretary  of  state.62  The  law  was  ineffective,  although  it 

87  Detroit  News,  August  23,  1912. 

68  Ibid.,  October  I,  13,  1912. 

69  Public  Acts,  1913,  No.  109. 

60  Detroit  News,  September  27,  1912. 
81  Ibid.,  February  20,  1913. 
62  Public  Acts,  1891,  No.  190. 


I4O  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [576 

was  observed,  at  least  formally,  by  committees  and  can- 
didates of  the  State  and  the  district  better  than  by  those  of 
the  counties.63  The  meaning  of  the  law  with  respect  to  item- 
ization  was  not  clear,  and  as  a  result  most  of  the  statements 
filed  give  the  expenditures  in  a  lump  sum.  No  serious 
attempt  was  made  to  enforce  the  law  or  to  prosecute  those 
who  ignored  it;  and,  as  there  was  little  public  interest  in 
expenditure,  the  statements  became  purely  voluntary  and 
in  many  cases  were  carelessly  drawn  and  incomplete.64  The 
provisions  for  publicity  of  expenditure  were  repealed  in 
I9OI.65 

The  corrupt  practice  act  of  1913  restricts  the  expenditure 
of  candidates  to  twenty-five  per  cent  of  one  year's  emolu- 
ments of  the  office  sought,  but  places  no  limit  on  the  dis- 
bursements of  committees.  It  requires  every  party  com- 
mittee to  appoint  a  treasurer  who  shall  receive,  keep,  and 
disburse  the  campaign  fund,  and  specifically  enumerates 
legitimate  objects  of  expenditure.  It  prescribes  that  within 
twenty  days  after  the  general  election  every  treasurer  and 
every  candidate  shall  file  with  the  clerk  of  the  county  of 
residence  a  sworn  and  itemized  statement  of  receipts,  dis- 
bursements, and  unpaid  debts.  Although  the  law  appears 
to  make  adequate  provision  for  the  enforcement  of  the  act, 
there  is  widespread  doubt  as  to  the  completeness  and 
accuracy  of  the  statements.66  A  few  politicians  favor  a  plan 
of  state  payment  of  campaign  expenses,  but  there  is  no 
general  demand  in  Michigan  for  this  innovation,  although 

63  At  the  end  of  the  time  limit  in  1892  forty-one  candidates  in  Wayne 
County  had  obeyed    the  law,  while    eighty-nine  had    not    (Detroit 
Tribune,  November  29,  1892). 

64  Detroit  Free  Press,  November  22,  1894.    Mr.  Perry  Belmont  called 
this  Michigan  law  "comparatively  deficient  and  ineffective"   (North 
American  Review,  February,  1905).    As  to  other  characterizations  of  this 
law  see  Gregory,  Corrupt  Use  of  Money  in  Politics,  p.  15.     A  newspaper 
writer  estimated  in  1894  that  some  of  the  statements  were  cut  down  to 
twenty-five  per  cent  of  the  actual  amounts  (Detroit  Free  Press,  No- 
vember 22,  1894). 

66  Public  Acts,  1901,  No.  61. 

88  One  county  secretary  thinks  that  it  is  impossible  to  make  them 
accurate.  I  have  not  considered  it  necessary  to  discuss  the  federal 
laws  relating  to  the  campaign  finances  of  congressional  and  senatorial 
candidates,  the  first  of  which  was  enacted  in  1910.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  36, 
p.  83;  vol.  37,  pt.  i,  pp.  27-28. 


577]  CAMPAIGN  MANAGEMENT  AND  FINANCE  141 

the  State  has  already  assumed  some  functions  which  form- 
erly belonged  to  partisan  campaigning;  for  example,  the 
printing  and  distribution  of  ballots. 

Campaign  Expenditure. — The  provisions  of  the  general 
election  law  of  1891  restricting  legitimate  objects  of  ex- 
penditure to  the  printing  and  circulating  of  literature  and 
the  conveying  of  sick  and  infirm  electors  to  the  polls  were 
generally  recognized  as  ridiculous  and  futile.  On  the  rec- 
ommendation of  Governor  Rich — who  urged  that,  although 
it  seemed  wise  to  specify  for  what  objects  money  might  be 
expended,  all  legitimate  objects  be  permitted — the  legis- 
lature of  1893  legalized  the  following  objects  of  expenditure: 
office  or  hall  rent,  postage,  stationery,  clerk  hire,  music  at 
public  meetings,  speakers,  transportation  of  committee- 
men,  challengers,  persons  to  inspect  the  registration  of 
voters,  the  preparation  of  lists  of  voters  in  the  election 
precincts,  the  printing  and  circulating  of  literature,  and  the 
conveyance  of  electors  to  the  polls.67 

A  statement  of  expenditures  of  the  Republican  county 
committee  in  the  Wayne  County  campaign  of  1892  is  the 
most  detailed  statement  available  for  the  early  years  and 
is  probably  fairly  typical.68  About  one  fourth  of  the  total 
expenditure  of  $4322.92  was  for  printing;  the  remainder  was 
for  the  following  items,  which  are  arranged  in  the  order  of 
amounts  disbursed:  postage  and  mailing  circulars  and 
newspapers,  rent  of  halls,  detective  service,  speakers, 
banners  and  torches,  challengers,  office  expense,  canvassing 
illegal  registrations,  equipping  clubs,  schools  of  instruction 
for  voters,  bands  and  music,  attorneys'  fees,  receiving  re- 
turns at  headquarters,  livery-stable  bills,  stereopticon,  and 
R.  L.  Polk  and  Company's  directory.  A  large  part  of  cam- 
paign expenditure  has  always  been  for  the  payment  of  work- 
ers, and  for  subsidies  of  various  kinds,  for  cigars,  drinks,  and 
other  forms  of  entertainment,  and  for  the  outright  purchase 
of  votes, — items  which  are  not  found  in  formal  statements 
and  are  naturally  difficult  to  appraise  with  any  degree  of 
accuracy;  but  in  a  county  like  Wayne  in  1892  or  1896  it  is 

67  Public  Acts,  1893,  No.  202. 

68  Detroit  Tribune,  November  29,  1892. 


142  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [578 

probable  that  any  one  of  the  three  items  named  would 
amount  to  as  much  as  all  the  others  combined.69  The 
county  committee  at  that  time  also  spent  some  money  in 
the  naturalization  of  foreigners  and  in  the  payment  of 
salaries.  To  illustrate  the  devious  ways  in  which  money 
may  be  used  to  influence  votes — methods  which  are  not 
acknowledged  in  sworn  statements  or  newspaper  interviews 
— one  who  helped  to  manage  the  Republican  campaign  in 
1896  relates  that  in  that  year  money  from  the  Republican 
national  committee  repaired  every  Roman  Catholic  church 
in  Monroe  County.  It  has  been  the  general  belief  of  poli- 
ticians that  the  Polish  Catholics  vote  as  their  priests  advise. 
Moreover  a  suspicion  at  times  gained  currency  that  money 
collected  for  a  campaign  fund  was  used  by  the  county  com- 
mittee in  the  party  primaries  to  perpetuate  its  own  power.70 
There  is  unfortunately  no  record  of  the  items  of  expenditure 
in  the  interesting  state  campaigns  of  1892  and  i896.71  In 

69 "  In  close  campaigns  in  doubtful  districts,  by  far  the  largest  part 
of  the  funds  goes  for  the  direct  or  indirect  purchase  of  voters"  (J.  W. 
Jenks,  "Money  in  Practical  Politics,"  in  Century  Magazine,  vol.  44, 
p.  942ff). 

70  Detroit  Tribune,  October  27,  1892. 

71 A  statement  of  the  Republican  state  central  committee  in  1898 
gives  the  general  objects  of  expenditure  and  the  amounts  disbursed  as 
follows:* 

Speakers,  travelling  expenses,  hotel  bills,  etc $3102.89 

Literature,  printing,  and  advertising 2435.55 

Office  expenses 1040.92 

Postage 897.00 

Telegraph 320.62 

Expressage  on  literature 291.1 1 

Telephone 111.22 

Total $8199.31 

For  comparison  I  add  the  report  of  the  Democratic  state  central  com- 
mittee in  1912  :b 

Advertising  and  hall  rent $41 10.91 

Administration  expenses 35°7-°4 

Printing  and  engraving 1 167.38 

Telegraph 817.94 

Speakers 726.39 

Supplies 619.64 

Postage 560.00 

Expressage 358.1 1 

Miscellaneous 286.81 

Telephone 158.69 

Total $12352.69 

'  Statement  filed  with  secretary  of  state. 
b  Detroit  News,  February  14,  1913. 


579]  CAMPAIGN   MANAGEMENT  AND  FINANCE  143 

other  reports  the  items  are  so  general  that  a  comparison  of 
them  has  little  significance.72 

Present-day  managers  have  pretty  generally  discarded 
various  objects  of  expenditures  considered  in  the  nineties 
essential  to  successful  campaigning;  for  example,  banners, 
distribution  of  newspapers,  torches,  uniforms,  the  equip- 
ment of  clubs,  buttons,  parades,  jollifications,  ratifications, 
vehicles  on  election  day,  and  schools  for  voters.  But  on  the 
other  hand  such  items  as  newspaper  advertising,  automobile 
hire,  cards,  cuts,  posters,  employment  of  stenographers, 
salaries,  and  films  are  either  new  or  relatively  more  im- 
portant. Changed  methods  of  campaigning  have  been  oc- 
casioned by  legal  restrictions,  new  inventions,  rural  free 
delivery,  and  rising  standards  of  public  morality  and  in- 
telligence. 

In  the  statements  of  individual  candidates  the  principal 
items  prior  to  1900  were  assessments,  printing,  postage, 
advertising,  stationery,  and  travelling.  Individual  candi- 
dates at  the  present  time  spend  most  largely  for  advertising.73 
In  campaigns  for  petty  township  and  ward  offices  the  chief 
expenditures  have  been  for  cigars  and  drinks,  dispensed 
customarily  after  the  election;  and  in  the  rare  instances 
when  the  township  committee  handles  any  money  its  ex- 
penditures are  for  canvasses,  challengers,  and  conveyances 
on  election  day. 

72  Preliminary  to  the  1915  election  of  supreme  court  justices  and 
university  regents  apparently  the  only  campaign  material  that  the 
Republicans  used  was  192  pages  of  boiler-plate. 

73  Fairly  typical  in  its  items,  although    exceptionally  large    in  its 
totals,  is  the  statement  of  a  Republican  candidate  for  probate  judge  in 
Wayne  County  in  1914:  advertising,  $815.95;  postage,  $308;  printing, 
$232.07 ;  stationery,  $41 ;  assessment  to  city  committee,  $25 ;  distributing 
cards,  $13;  banners,  $10.30;  hall  rent,  $10;  cuts,  $6;  photographs, 
$3-75;  addressing  envelopes,  $2;  making  a  total  of  $1467.07.     This 
account  in  its  distribution  of  expenditures  does  not  differ  much  except 
as  to  banners  and  flags  from  the  statement  of  a  Republican  candidate 
for  sheriff  sixteen  years  before,  who  spent  for  printing  and  advertising 
$1000;  for  an  assessment  to  the  county  committee,  $800;  for  banners 
and  flags,  $600;  for  bills  and  posting,  $120;  and  for  miscellaneous, 
$300;  a  total  of  $2820   (Detroit  Tribune,  November  29,   1898).     A 
Republican  candidate  for  county  treasurer,  however,  in  the  same  cam- 
paign spent  out  of  a  total  of  $1603.38  little  if  anything  for  banners  and 
flags(ibid.,  November  17,  1898). 


144  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [580 

According  to  the  corrupt  practice  act  of  1913,  candidates 
for  nomination  or  for  election  and  political  committees  are 
permitted  to  make  no  disbursements  except  for  travelling 
expenses  and  incidental  personal  expenses,  for  printing, 
stationery,  advertising,  postage,  expressage,  freight,  tele- 
graph, telephone,  and  public  messenger  service,  for  dissemi- 
nation of  printed  information,  for  political  meetings,  dem- 
onstrations, and  conventions,  for  the  rent,  maintenance, 
and  furnishing  of  offices,  for  the  payment  of  clerks,  type- 
writers, stenographers,  janitors,  and  messengers,  for  the 
employment  of  the  legal  number  of  challengers,  for  the 
payment  of  public  speakers  and  musicians  and  their  travel- 
ling expenses,  for  copying  and  classifying  election  registers 
or  poll  lists,  investigating  the  right  of  persons  so  listed  or 
registered  to  vote  and  conducting  proceedings  to  purge  the 
registers  and  lists  and  prevent  improper  or  unlawful  regis- 
tration or  voting,  for  making  canvasses  of  voters,  for  con- 
veying infirm  or  disabled  voters  to  and  from  the  polls,  and 
for  the  employment  of  counsel. 

While  a  large  number  of  statements  of  expenditure  were 
filed  between  1891  and  1901  and  a  number  have  been 
published  officially  or  unofficially  since  1901,  it  is  neverthe- 
less extremely  difficult  to  reach  any  conclusion  as  to  totals 
of  expenditure.  Taking  the  statements  of  committees  at 
their  face  value,  we  see  that  the  Republican  state  committee 
spent  more  in  1896  than  in  any  subsequent  campaign,  and 
that  the  Democrats  disbursed  more  than  twice  as  much  in 
1892  as  in  any  campaign  since  that  time.74  According  to 

74  The  expenditures  of  the  state  committees,  as  far  as  I  have  been  able 
to  secure  them  from  official  and  unofficial  sources,  were  as  follows: 
Year  Republican  Democratic 

1892 $40,641.32  $46,286.92 

1893 2,l66.0O 

1894 19,677.48  10,330.00 

1895 1,665.62 

1896 60,332.28'  6,775.00" 

1897 2,6OO.OO 

1898 8,199.31 

igOO 38,715.14 

1901 974-34 

1902 20,000.00 

1904 40,000.00 


58 1 ]  CAMPAIGN  MANAGEMENT  AND  FINANCE  145 

the  statements  the  Wayne  County  Republican  committee 
spent  its  maximum  in  1894,  the  Democratic  committee  in 
i892.75  The  expenditures  of  individual  candidates  were 
larger  in  the  nineties.  A  successful  candidate  for  the 
supreme  bench  of  the  State  in  1892  spent  $4048.25  in  addi- 
tion to  an  expenditure  by  his  committee  of  $7844.95.  A 
Republican  candidate  for  sheriff  in  Wayne  County  in  1894 
spent  $8185.05.  The  Republican  candidate  for  governor  in 
1896  reports  that  he  spent  $4356,  and  the  candidate  in  1900, 
$4657.80;  the  Democratic  candidate  for  governor  in  1894 
admitted  that  he  invested  $3534.54  in  the  venture,  and  an 
unsuccessful  Democratic  candidate  for  state  treasurer  in 
1892  disbursed  $5000.  Congressional  candidates  in  1892 
and  1894  spent  as  high  as  $4000.  These  are  extreme,  not 
average,  expenditures;  but  the  most  extravagant  candidates 
spend  no  such  amounts  nowadays.  The  Republican  candi- 
date for  sheriff  in  Wayne  County  in  1914  spent  $451.49; 
the  most  prodigal  congressional  candidate  in  1912  spent 
only  $2720.57  and  in  1914  only  $2329.50;  the  average  ex- 
penditure of  Republican  congressional  candidates  was  in 
1912  $1138.63  and  in  1914  $942.24.76 

To  estimate  the  total  amount  spent  by  all  candidates 
and  committees  would  be  a  hopeless  task.  A  newspaper 
writer,  however,  estimated  in  1892  that  the  total  amount 

1908 30,000.00  12,624.40 

1910 5,000.00 

1912 50-60,000.00  12,352.69 

1914 8,331.03  19,889.72 

1915 1,104.38  352-oo 

*  The  Gold  Democrats  spent  $14,598.48. 

b  The  Populist  central  committee  spent  $896.31  and  the  Union  Silver 
central  committee,  $1123.30. 

According  to  A.  J.  Lacey,  the  Democratic  treasurer  in  1912,  the 
Democrats  spent  $10,600  in  1904  and  $7500  in  1908  (Detroit  News, 
October  13,  1912).  In  his  opinion  the  Republicans  spent  more  than 
$90,000  in  1914  and  at  least  that  amount  in  1908  (ibid.).  The  Republi- 
can figures  for  1902,  1904,  1908,  and  1912  are  those  furnished  by  men 
who  were  in  charge  of  the  finances  in  those  years. 

76  The  Republican  expenditure  in  1894  was  $5280.34  and  the  Demo- 
cratic in  1892,  $5492.92.  In  1896  the  Kent  County  Republican  com- 
mittee spent  $6400. 

78  The  expenditures  in  1914  of  the  county  committees  and  the  five 
principal  county  candidates  in  the  two  typical  counties  which  I  have 
cited  before  are  given  in  the  following  table: 

10 


146 


PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN 


[582 


spent  by  candidates  and  committees  in  Wayne  County  was 
about  $52,000,  of  which  about  half  had  been  reported  in 
sworn  statements,77 — an  expenditure  of  about  one  dollar  for 
every  man  who  voted  in  the  county  in  that  election.  In 
1914  the  expenditure  in  Calhoun  County  by  Republican, 
Democratic,  and  Progressive  candidates  was  less  than  fifty 
cents  per  vote. 

A  comparison,  therefore,  of  the  reported  expenditures, 
with  a  consideration  of  the  fact  that  understatement  was 
more  general  in  the  nineties  than  now  and  that  secret 
expenditure  was  much  greater  at  that  time,  warrants  the 
conclusion  that  on  the  whole,  campaign  expenditure  is  much 
less  at  the  present  time, — and  this  in  spite  of  the  fact  that 
there  has  been  an  increase  in  population  and  in  cost  of 
living  and  a  decrease  in  the  number  of  those  newspapers 
which  formerly  circulated  an  immense  amount  of  ex  parte 
campaign  argument.  This  .decrease  in  expenditure  is  due, 
in  the  first  place,  obviously  to  the  fact  that  committees 
have  not  had  the  money  to  spend,  contributions  having  in 
general  been  less.  Publicity  of  campaign  contributions  and 
the  prohibition  of  corporation  gifts  have  tended  to  curtail 
campaign  finances.  Of  like  effect  has  been  the  general 
decline  in  partisanship;  a  more  sober  and  discriminating 
public  sentiment  has  made  useless  various  methods  of  cam- 
paigning which  were  as  expensive  as  they  were  picturesque ; 
secret  expenditure  and  graft  have  diminished;  financial 
operations  have  become  more  business-like,  more  efficient, 
and  less  wasteful ;  and  in  the  opinion  of  some  the  passing  of 
the  money  question  and  the  decline  of  the  tariff  as  political 


Office 

Ingham 

Washtenaw 

Rep. 

Dem. 

Rep. 

Dem. 

County  commissioner  
Sheriff  

$1,961.59 
306.49 
255-00 
276.56 
418.25 
343-42 

$1,  12I.I6 
287.IO 

88.48 

88.il 

365-07 
133.82 

$1,484.25 
6CK).OO 
160.65 
298.41 
276.60 
293-95 

$819.34 
511.27 
154.30 
247-53 
258.45 
247.85 

Prosecuting  attorney  

Clerk  

Register  of  deeds  

Treasurer  

77  Detroit  Tribune,  November  29,  1892. 


583]  CAMPAIGN   MANAGEMENT  AND   FINANCE  147 

issues  rob  the  Republicans  of  revenue-raising  weapons. 
After  eliminating  waste  and  corruption,  however,  it  is  not 
certain  that  a  further  decrease  in  campaign  expenditure  is 
desirable ;  for  if  campaigns  are  educative  the  cost  which  they 
entail  may  be  looked  upon  as  a  good  rather  than  as  an  evil. 

Accounting. — The  party  organization,  especially  in  the 
counties,  formerly  exercised  an  extremely  loose  supervision 
over  its  finances.  Prior  to  1913  the  legal  requirements  for 
publicity  did  not  necessitate  exactitude  in  accounting;  and 
as  the  party  and  its  candidates  looked  chiefly  for  results 
and  paid  slight  heed  to  the  means  used  to  achieve  these 
results,  most  persons  in  and  out  of  the  organization  were 
indifferent  to  questions  of  financial  control.78  Cash  con- 
tributions were  handed  to  the  chairman  or  to  other  party 
workers,  and  lack  of  responsibility  as  well  as  the  large 
amounts  handled  furnished  ample  opportunity  for  graft. 
Occasionally  charges  of  misuse  of  funds  reached  the  news- 
papers. Candidates  and  committeemen  were  the  victims 
of  various  kinds  of  appeals,  such  as  those  of  church  and 
charitable  societies  for  subscriptions,  of  the  Michigan  Re- 
publican Newspaper  Association  for  assistance,  of  the 
Progressive  Colored  Voters'  League  for  the  wherewithal  to 
swing  the  vote  of  the  negroes,  or  of  one  of  the  "boys"  for 
ten  or  fifteen  dollars  to  assist  in  delivering  votes.79  When 
money  was  being  used  freely  many  of  these  boys  lived  on 
the  subsidies  which  they  secured  from  the  politicians.  The 
corrupt  practice  act  of  1913  not  only  made  illegal  the 
demoralizing  practice  of  hiring  personal  workers,  but  also 
expressly  prohibited  solicitation  by  religious,  charitable,  or 
social  organizations  of  any  donation,  any  purchase  of 
tickets,  or  any  similar  requests  made  of  candidates  for  nomi- 
nation or  election. 

Waste  in  expenditure  is  known  to  have  been  enormous. 
Accounting,  such  as  it  was,  was  more  careful  in  presidential 
than  in  off-year  campaigns.  The  state  committee  always 
had  a  treasurer  and  usually  a  bookkeeper.  "My  accounts 

"Detroit  Tribune,  March  19,  1896. 

79  Ibid.,  February  6,  March  28,  1891;  Detroit  News,  October  18, 
1910. 


148  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [584 

were  kept  as  carefully  as  the  books  of  a  bank,"  declares  a 
Republican  ex-treasurer.  "Even  money  for  postage  was 
paid  out  on  voucher."  Since  1904  financial  management 
has  greatly  improved;  and  in  this  respect  the  effect  of  the 
corrupt  practice  act  of  1913  as  exhibited  in  the  campaign 
of  1914  has  been  marked,  the  financial  statements  of  the 
two  central  committees,  especially  that  of  the  Democratic, 
giving  evidence  of  precise  and  conscientious  accounting  and 
reporting.  In  this  campaign  both  committees  had  expert 
bookkeepers. 

The  county  committees  have  frequently  dispensed  with  a 
treasurer  and  have  rarely  employed  a  bookkeeper.  But  in 
county  and  state  organizations  alike  the  trend  is  toward 
more  careful  accounting,  more  economical  expenditure,  and 
greater  observance  of  the  law.  It  is  needless  to  say  that  the 
financial  operations  of  party  organizations  have  yielded 
deficits  rather  than  surpluses,  and  the  cancelling  of  debts 
has  been  one  of  the  recognized  responsibilities  of  the  chair- 
man.80 Even  at  the  end  of  the  1912  campaign,  after  having 
spent  about  sixty  thousand  dollars,  the  Republicans  had  a 
deficit  of  seven  thousand  dollars.81  Sometimes  a  com- 
mittee with  a  surplus  has  turned  over  its  balance  to  a  less 
fortunate  committee  of  the  same  community;  for  even  in 
the  days  of  frenzied  finance,  campaigns  were  sometimes 
closed  with  a  substantial  balance.82 

80  Detroit  Tribune,  March  6,  1901.     The  figures  which  follow  are 
derived  from  newspaper  reports  which  are  greatly  exaggerated  and 
admittedly  worthless  as  to  specific  cases,  but  which  are,  nevertheless, 
suggestive  of  the  general  condition.     The  Democratic  victory  in  1890, 
according  to  these  reports,  cost  Chairman  Campau  $28,000,  and  in  other 
campaigns  he  is  said  to  have  paid  bills  amounting  to  many  thousands. 
After  one  campaign  Senator  McMillan  is  reported  to  have  paid  bills 
for  the  Republicans  aggregating  $27,000,  and  in  1901  a  Tribune  re- 
porter estimated  that   politics  had  cost  the  senator  approximately 
$400,000.     A  former  private  secretary  of  the  senator  considers  this 
estimate  ridiculously  exaggerated. 

81  Detroit  Free  Press,  December  30,  1914. 

82  At  the  end  of  the  1896  campaign  the  Republicans  had  a  surplus  of 
$3000  (Detroit  Tribune,  November  20,  1896).     They  began  the  1910 
contest  with  a  balance  of  about  $1600  (Detroit  News,  October  9,  1910). 
After  the  April  election  in  1915  the  Republicans  had  a  balance  of 
$645.62,  and  the  Democrats  one  of  $975  (Detroit  Free  Press,  May  17, 
1916),  but  at  the  opening  of  the  1916  campaign  the  Republican  com- 
mittee was  in  debt  about  $4000  (ibid.,  May  4,  1916). 


585]  CAMPAIGN  MANAGEMENT  AND  FINANCE  149 

Speaking, — A  most  important  feature  of  political  cam- 
paigns has  been  public  speaking,  and  in  this  the  Republicans 
of  Michigan  have  easily  surpassed  the  Democrats.  With 
respect  to  this  feature  the  1896  campaign  was  epochal, 
enlisting  a  greater  number  of  speakers  than  any  subsequent 
contest  and  introducing  into  politics  many  young  men  who 
have  since  attained  high  office.83  In  that  campaign  the 
speaking  was  not  only  quantitatively  exceptional  but 
qualitatively  of  a  high  order.  In  a  presidential  campaign 
speaking  has  usually  begun  in  September  and  in  a  state 
campaign  about  the  first  of  October,  reaching  its  maximum 
intensity  during  the  final  week.  The  purpose  of  speaking 
is  not  so  much  to  convince  and  convert  unbelievers  as  to 
hold  the  party  members  in  line,  harmonize  local  differences, 
and  arouse  partisan  enthusiasm.  The  speaker  is  not  so 
much  an  advocate  as  an  ambassador.  Managers  usually 
avail  themselves  of  three  classes  of  speakers:  candidates, 
local  volunteers,  and  speakers  from  other  States.  Many 
local  "spellbinders"  have  been  brought  out  by  party  clubs;84 
some  confine  their  activity  to  a  ward,  a  city,  a  county,  or  a 
district,  and  others  stump  the  whole  State.  Clubs  with 
headquarters  in  Detroit,  like  the  Republican  Michigan 
Club,  offer  speakers  to  the  party  committees.85  The  Re- 
publican state  committee  has  had  a  speakers'  bureau  which 
has  taken  charge  of  the  securing  and  scheduling  of  speakers 
for  the  state  campaign;86  in  Wayne  the  Republican  county 
committee  has  sometimes  had  a  committee  on  speakers;87 
and  in  other  counties  the  chairman  or  the  secretary  has 
usually  made  arrangements  for  meetings.  The  scheduling 
of  speakers  has  never  been  an  easy  task,  influenced  as  it  is 
by  local  social,  religious,  racial,  and  economic  conditions; 
and  assignments  made  by  the  state  committee  have  often 
been  displeasing  to  county  or  city  politicians. 

83  One  of  the  United  States  senators  and  a  congressman  in  1915  were 
men  who  began  campaign  speaking  in  1896. 

84  Detroit  Tribune,  January  12,  1888,  October  6,  1898. 

86  Ibid.,  September  22,  1898;  Detroit  Free  Press,  November  18,  1908. 
89  Detroit  Free  Press,  September  10, 1896;  Detroit  Tribune,  Septem- 
ber 1 8,  1894. 

87  Detroit  Tribune,  October  I,  1896,  November  3,  1898. 


I5O  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [586 

The  state  committee  has  rarely  rejected  speakers  sent  by 
the  national  committee,88  although  in  a  recent  campaign 
the  Republican  managers  received  with  no  special  en- 
thusiasm an  unlucky  assortment  of  "lame  ducks"  from 
States  which  had  gone  Democratic.  Differences  are 
adjusted  and  conflicts  avoided  by  conferences  or  corre- 
spondence, in  the  first  place  between  the  national  and  the 
state  managers  and  in  the  second  place  between  the  state 
and  the  county  managers.  If  not  consulted  beforehand, 
the  county  is  notified  when  a  speaker  is  scheduled  to  appear 
within  the  county,  and  the  local  organization  is  expected  to 
provide  hall,  advertising,  and  entertainment.  The  national 
committee  has  usually  arranged  the  itineraries  of  especially 
distinguished  speakers  like  Bryan,  Roosevelt,  Taft,  or 
Wilson,  often  after  a  report  from  the  state  chairman  as  to 
the  places  where  he  desired  the  speaker  to  stop;  and  the 
state  committee  has  paid  expenses  within  the  State.89  In 
the  campaign  of  1896  the  Republicans  had  two  hundred 
and  twenty  speakers,  one  hundred  and  twenty  furnished  by 
the  state  committee  and  one  hundred  by  the  national 
committee.90  Twelve  years  later  the  Republicans  had  only 
fifty  speakers,  few  of  whom  came  from  outside  the  State;91 
and  yet  in  that  campaign,  which  was  comparatively  quiet, 
four  hundred  and  twenty-four  Republican  meetings  were 
held  in  Wayne  County  under  the  auspices  of  the  county 
organization.92  In  1912  the  Republicans  had  about  the 
same  number  of  speakers  as  in  1908  and  probably  even 
fewer  from  outside.93 

Candidates  for  office,  unless  without  means  or  outside 
their  own  candidacies,  have  usually  spoken  without  pay,94 
and  often  in  addition  have  defrayed  their  own  travelling 

88  In  1896  the  Republican  state  committee  rejected  at  least  one  man, 
a  resident  of  Michigan,  whom  Hanna  proposed  to  assign  to  the  State. 

89  Detroit  Tribune,  August  26,  September  6,  1900. 

90  Detroit  Free  Press,  November  3,  18,  1908. 

91  Ibid.,  August  25,  November  3,  1908. 

92  Ibid.,  November  18,  1908. 

93  Detroit  News,  October  30,  1912. 

94  Detroit  Free  Press,  September  15,  1896.     For  an  exception  see 
ibid.,  August  27,  1908. 


587]  CAMPAIGN  MANAGEMENT  AND  FINANCE  151 

expenses.  Paid  speakers,  more  often  Republican  than 
Democratic,  have  received  from  ten  to  fifteen  dollars  a  night 
and  expenses.95  Bryan's  tour  of  the  State  in  1900  is  said 
to  have  cost  seven  hundred  dollars,96  and  Governor  John- 
son's expenses  in  1912  totalled  five  hundred  dollars;97  but 
if  we  may  believe  the  newspapers  a  special  train  through 
the  State  in  1896  cost  the  Gold  Democrats  five  thousand 
dollars.98  In  general,  expenditure  for  speakers  appears  to 
have  steadily  decreased.  According  to  its  treasurer  the 
Democratic  state  organization  in  1912  did  not  have  a  single 
paid  speaker  in  the  field.99 

Public  speaking  has  apparently  lost  much  of  its  popularity 
and  effectiveness.  Automobiles  have  introduced  a  kind  of 
"pop-gun"  campaigning,  in  which  a  large  number  of  in- 
formal, quiet,  outdoor  gatherings  have  taken  the  place  of 
the  great  rousing  rallies  of  former  electoral  struggles. 
Nowadays  the  candidate  or  the  stump  speaker  seeks  out  the 
voter,  who  has  become  more  sophisticated,  less  partisan, 
and  less  amenable  to  mass  influences.  The  decline  of 
campaign  speaking  may  be  attributed  to  a  variety  of  in- 
fluences; namely,  the  apparent  absence  in  recent  campaigns 
of  clear-cut  party  principles ;  the  growth  of  independence  in 
politics,  with  a  disinclination  on  the  part  of  the  voter  to  be 
dictated  to;  the  rise  of  socialism,  providing  intellectual  satis- 
faction to  many  who  formerly  attended  party  meetings; 
the  direct  primary  with  its  somewhat  wearisome  and  con- 
fusing speaking  campaign;  new  means  of  transportation, 
with  a  multiplying  of  small  meetings;  the  increase  of  counter- 
attractions  ;  and  finally  the  completeness  and  attractiveness 
of  the  modern  newspaper  and  magazine  as  a  medium  of 
political  instruction.  There  has  been  a  marked  tendency 
for  newspapers  to  become  independent  in  politics;100  ac- 
cordingly as  a  medium  of  instruction  they  appear  to  be 

95  Detroit  Free  Press,  August  27,  November  3,  1908.     Cf.  ibid.,  July 
21,  1916. 

96  Detroit  Tribune,  October  2,  1900. 

97  Detroit  News,  September  10,  1912. 

98  Detroit  Tribune,  November  II,  1896. 

99  Detroit  News,  October  13,  1912. 

100  See  above,  page  14. 


152  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [588 

safer  and  more  adequate,  at  the  same  time  ceasing  editori- 
ally or  in  their  news  columns  to  urge  the  voter  to  attend 
particular  meetings. 

Demonstrations. — Consonant  with  recent  tendencies,  the 
more  spectacular  methods  of  campaigning — barbecues, 
pole-raisings,  ratifications,  and  jollifications — have  passed 
to  the  limbo  of  things  political.101  In  the  campaign  of  1892 
pole-raisings  were  numerous  and  were  encouraged  by  the 
state  central  committees;102  but  in  1896  they  were  com- 
paratively infrequent  and  in  1898  had  become  a  rarity. 
In  1892  and  to  a  lesser  degree  in  1896  important  meetings 
and  rallies  were  preceded  by  parades  of  loyal  partisans, 
especially  of  the  party  clubs,  many  being  mounted,  uni- 
formed, and  equipped  with  torch-lights,  emblems,  and 
transparencies.  According  to  a  Tribune  report,  probably 
exaggerated,  one  parade  in  Detroit  in  1896  cost  fifty-five 
thousand  dollars.103  By  1904,  however,  the  torch-light  as  a 
political  argument  had  apparently  joined  the  hickory  pole  and 
the  roast  ox;104  and  party  parades  are  now  rarely  employed. 

Ratification  meetings,  held  usually  under  the  auspices  of 
party  clubs  and  having  for  their  purpose  the  public  endorse- 
ment of  the  nominees  by  the  rank  and  file  of  the  party,  were 
almost  universal  in  1888  and  1892,  but  after  1896  little  is 
heard  of  them.105  After-election  ratifications,  taking  the 
form  of  jollifications  or  "blow-outs,"  were  celebrations  of 
victory  characterized  by  long  and  incongruous  processions, 
humorous  transparencies,  red  fire,  Roman  candles,  and 
ear-splitting  noise.  Michigan  saw  and  heard  many  Demo- 
cratic jollifications  in  1892 ;  but  the  Republicans  in  1896  and 
afterward  held  scarcely  any  of  these  collective  outbursts  of 
partisan  jubilation.106 

101 A  barbecue  was  planned  for  the  great  Roosevelt  rally  at  Battle 
Creek,  in  1916. 

02  Detroit  Tribune,  October  21,  1892. 

103  Ibid.,  November  10,  1896. 

104  For  a  notice  of  one,  see  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  October  21,  1904. 
See  also  Detroit  Free  Press,  November  3,  1908.    As  is  well  known,  the 
parade  and  the  torch-light  were  again  in  evidence  in  1916. 

106  There  were  not  many  in  1896  (Detroit  Free  Press  July  23, 29, 1896). 
106  For  an  account  of  a  jollification  in  1900,  see  Grand  Rapids  Herald, 
November  13,  1900. 


589]  CAMPAIGN  MANAGEMENT  AND  FINANCE  153 

Literature. — The  management  of  the  literary  side  of  the 
campaign  has  been  much  like  that  of  the  forensic.  Most 
of  the  committees,  even  some  of  the  county  committees, 
have  prepared  printed  material,  and  the  national  com- 
mittee has  sent  great  quantities  of  literature  to  the  state  com- 
mittee, which  through  its  publicity  agent,  literary  bureau, 
or  secretaries,  has  redistributed  it  among  the  county  com- 
mittees and  clubs.  Literature  has  often  been  sent  to  the 
States  and  then  mailed  out  from  campaign  headquarters 
under  congressional  frank.107  Occasionally  the  national 
committee  has  sent  literature  directly  to  county  committees. 
Probably  more  literature  was  distributed  in  1896  than  in 
any  other  campaign;  and  at  the  end  of  that  campaign  the 
Republicans,  having  a  surplus,  discussed  the  advisability 
of  continuing  their  propaganda  between  campaigns,  but 
they  did  not  do  so.108  Like  other  features  of  campaigning 
there  are  no  adequate  statistics  in  regard  to  the  amount  of 
documentary  material  used;  but  near  the  end  of  the  cam- 
paign of  1898  the  Republican  state  chairman  said  that  he 
was  sending  out  eighteen  thousand  pieces  of  mail  daily.109 

The  kinds  of  printed  matter  used  in  campaigns  are 
various;  and  there  is  a  difference  of  opinion  as  to  their 
effectiveness,  most  politicians  agreeing,  however,  that 
excerpts  from  the  Congressional  Record,  used  extensively  in 
the  nineties,  are  of  little  value.  Lithographs  of  the  can- 
didates are  still  considered  necessary;  but  buttons,  which 
were  handed  out  literally  by  the  bushel  in  1896,  are  now  used 
to  a  less  extent,  although  thousands  of  them  have  been  dis- 
tributed in  recent  campaigns.  Bill-board  advertising  is  a 
new  and  popular  means  of  appeal,  and  every  county  com- 
mittee uses  hundred  of  posters  as  well  as  other  forms  of 
outdoor  advertising.  Individual  candidates  mail  their 
personal  cards,  or  have  them  handed  to  the  voters;  and 
some  believe  that  an  attractive  circular  or  a  personally 
signed  letter  sent  directly  to  the  voters  is  most  effective. 

107  Detroit  Free  Press,  October  14,  1890,  September  19,  1896;  Detroit 
Tribune,  October  6,  1902. 

108  Detroit  Tribune,  November  20,  1896. 

109  Ibid.,  October  24,  1898. 


154  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN  [590 

To  those  who  can  not  or  will  not  read  the  political  cartoon 
makes  a  powerful  appeal.  Campaign  literature  is  either 
sent  through  the  mail  or  is  distributed  from  house  to  house. 
In  1908  the  Republican  organization  in  Detroit  had  from 
one  to  ten  men  in  every  precinct  distributing  literature. 

Newspapers. — The  most  popular  form  of  printed  material 
at  the  present  time,  but  one  which  was  scarcely  used  at  all 
twenty  years  ago,  is  newspaper  advertising.  The  corrupt 
practice  act  of  1913  prohibits  the  publishing  of  any  paid 
political  matter  unless  it  carries  a  statement  that  it  is  a 
paid  advertisement,  and  also  prohibits  payment  for  editorial 
advocacy.  Previous  to  this  enactment  the  party  managers 
often  bought  copies  of  newspapers  and  mailed  them  to  the 
voters,  sent  in  subscriptions  to  party  newspapers  in  the 
name  of  doubtful  voters,  furnished  large  quantities  of 
boiler-plate  free,110  and  in  some  cases  probably  assisted 
newspapers  by  direct  money  subsidies.  In  return  the 
newspaper  devoted  its  columns  to  party  service,  made  no 
charge  for  political  notices  and  advertising,111  and  sent  out 
sample  copies  during  the  campaign.  Early  in  the  nineties 
there  were  many  recognized  party  organs,  and  newspapers 
in  general  were  much  closer  to  the  party  organizations  than 
they  are  now.  Campaign  managers  clearly  perceived  the 
power  of  the  newspaper.  "The  local  party  newspaper  is 
the  campaigning  strength  of  the  party,"  said  a  circular  of 
the  Republican  national  committee  in  1892;  and  a  Repub- 
lican editor  who  later  became  governor  declared  in  1894  that 
"the  party  newspaper  ...  is  to-day  the  greatest  weapon 
with  which  political  battles  are  waged."112  In  1888  the 
Michigan  Republican  Editorial  League  was  organized;  in 
1893  the  Associated  Democratic  Press  of  Michigan.113 
With  the  shattering  of  party  ties  in  1 896  newspapers  became 
more  independent,  and  party  organs  have  now  practically 
disappeared.114  Newspaper  men  are  said  to  be  less  active 

110  Michigan  Press  Association  Bulletin,  1895,  p.  35. 

111  Ibid. 

112  Mr.  Chase  S.  Osborn  (Detroit  Tribune,  April  12,  1894). 

113  Ibid.,  April  12,  1888;  Detroit  Free  Press,  March  I,  1893. 

114  See  above,  page  14. 


59 1 ]  CAMPAIGN   MANAGEMENT  AND   FINANCE  155 

in  the  party  organizations  than  formerly ;  and  although 
political  advertising  in  newspapers  is  on  the  increase,  there 
are  some  who  believe  that  its  effectiveness  may  be  destroyed 
by  the  editorial  policy  of  the  paper  in  which  it  appears. 

Social  Campaigning. — After  all,  speeches  and  literature, 
while  indispensable,  have  their  limitations;  and  elections 
are  carried  by  more  intimate  and  less  intellectual  methods. 
Politicians  agree  that  where  their  use  is  possible  nothing  can 
take  the  place  of  the  personal  conversation  and  the  hand- 
shake. The  pen  is  mighty,  but  it  is  not  so  strong  as  the 
campaign  cigar.  It  would  be  ridiculous  to  attempt  a  def- 
inite estimate  of  the  amount  spent  in  electioneering  treat- 
ing. In  Detroit  the  activities  of  many  candidates  consisted 
and  still  consist  of  a  journey  from  one  saloon  to  another.115 

Activities  of  Candidates. — Candidates  now  are  probably 
no  more  active  in  campaigns  than  formerly,  but  they  are 
more  likely  to  take  a  hand  in  the  management  of  the  cam- 
paign. What  a  particular  candidate  will  do  in  a  campaign, 
however,  is  determined  by  considerations  peculiar  to  the 
man,  the  time,  and  the  locality.  As  a  matter  of  fact  a 
state  campaign  is  conducted  chiefly  "on"  the  head  of  the 
ticket,  and  he  is  expected  to  carry  the  other  candidates 
along  with  him.  In  the  counties  one  candidate  is  about  as 
important  to  the  party  as  another.  "I  have  to  work  the 
hardest,"  says  a  county  chairman,  "for  the  candidate  that 
I  like  the  least."  In  the  counties  the  chairman  keeps  in 
close  touch  with  the  candidates  during  the  campaign;  his 
usual  plan  is  to  distribute  the  candidates  about  the  county 
and  keep  them  moving  from  one  part  to  another,  meeting 
the  voters  personally  and  appearing  on  the  platform  at  the 
big  meetings.  There  is  usually  at  least  one  social  gathering 
early  in  the  campaign,  a  picnic,  banquet,  or  smoker,  at- 
tended by  the  committees,  the  candidates,  and  the  party 
workers. 

The  city  candidate  naturally  electioneers  more  strenu- 
ously than  does  the  rural.  In  the  last  four  weeks  of  the 
1908  campaign  in  Detroit  a  candidate  for  mayor  addressed 

115  W.  Macauley,  Reclaiming  the  Ballot,  pp.  7-26. 


156  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN   MICHIGAN  [592 

fifty  meetings  aggregating  fifty  thousand  people,  and 
attended  about  one  hundred  dances,  church  fairs,  and 
socials.  This  was  considered  the  most  strenuous  campaign 
ever  made  for  mayor  of  Detroit.116 

Workers. — During  the  campaign  the  manager  makes 
systematic  provision  for  keeping  in  touch  with  changes  in 
public  opinion.  For  this  purpose  he  supplements  his  corps 
of  talkers  with  a  corps  of  listeners  and  gatherers  of  informa- 
tion who  send  in  reports  as  to  the  general  drift  of  opinion, 
the  attitude  of  the  public  toward  particular  candidates,  and 
the  probable  vote  in  their  districts.  The  state  chairman 
keeps  himself  informed  of  local  conditions  through  district 
members  of  the  central  committee  and  by  means  of  corre- 
spondence and  conferences  with  the  county  organizations; 
and  in  the  past  he  has  had  the  county,  township,  ward,  and 
precinct  organizations  undertake  systematic  and  com- 
prehensive canvasses  by  house-to-house  visitation  or  by  the 
use  of  postal  cards.  Formal  canvasses  were  most  used  in 
1896.  In  that  year  the  Republican  state  committee  made 
three  canvasses  of  the  State,  two  of  the  aggregate  vote  and 
one  of  the  disaffected  vote.117  In  the  last  canvass,  which 
was  considered  the  most  valuable,  the  central  committee 
received  reports  from  eighteen  hundred  precincts,  which 
included  the  names  of  Democrats  who  purposed  voting  for 
McKinley  and  of  Republicans  who  inclined  toward  Bryan. 
Mr.  Campau,  who  in  1890  was  Democratic  state  chairman, 
says  that  he  personally  visited  during  that  campaign  sixty- 
two  counties,  in  some  cases  going  to  different  parts  of  the 
county.  Formal  canvasses  or  polls,  however,  are  expensive 
and  are  not  now  generally  believed  to  be  worth  the  cost. 
On  this  account  they,  like  many  other  campaign  practices, 
have  fallen  into  disuse;  but  with  their  abandonment  the 
chairman  has  not  relaxed  his  efforts  to  apprehend  and  follow 
the  drift  of  public  opinion.  A  good  campaign  manager 
usually  feels  popular  opinion  by  a  kind  of  instinct;  but  to 
assist  him  there  is  often  a  special  school-district  and  precinct 

118  Detroit  Free  Press,  November  I,  1908. 
117  Detroit  Tribune,  October  30,  1896. 


593]  CAMPAIGN  MANAGEMENT  AND  FINANCE  157 

organization  which  is  sometimes  secret  and  often  wholly 
outside  the  county  committee.  The  chief  qualifications  of 
precinct  workers  are  knowledge  of  the  political  game, 
ability  to  make  friends,  shrewdness,  and  dependability. 
They  have  to  be  watched  closely,  for  occasionally  one  sells 
himself  to  the  other  party.  In  Washtenaw  County  in  1914 
the  Democratic  organization  of  workers  consisted  of  about 
five  men  in  each  school-district  and  ward ;  the  Republicans 
had  one  man  in  each  school-district,  appointed  by  the 
township  committeemen,  and  twenty-five  men  in  each 
ward.  Another  county  chairman  appointed  from  one  to 
five  men  in  each  township  and  ward,  half  talkers  and  half 
listeners.118 

Getting  out  the  Vote. — The  final  and  perhaps  the  most 
important  task  of  this  extra  organization  of  workers  is  to 
get  out  the  vote  on  election  day;  and  for  this  purpose  the 
organization  is  further  strengthened  and  carefully  in- 
structed. The  members  of  the  Michigan  Club  and  of  the 
lesser  Republican  clubs  were  expected  to  work  at  the  polls.119 
Watchers  were  stationed  at  the  polls  with  lists  of  names, 
which  they  checked  off  as  fast  as  the  voters  cast  their 
ballots.  In  1890  the  Democratic  state  chairman's  plan 
for  getting  out  the  vote  involved  the  subdivision  of  coun- 
ties down  to  districts  comprising  not  more  than  two  sec- 
tions of  land,  each  district  to  be  in  charge  of  a  good 
Democrat  who  would  personally  see  all  fellow-partisans 
in  his  district  and  induce  them  to  vote  early,  and  would 
bring  in  with  teams  those  not  checked  off  by  one  o'clock.120 
In  1892,  according  to  a  newspaper  estimate,  the  Wayne 
County  Democratic  committee  had  two  men  in  each  pre- 
cinct to  get  out  the  vote;  in  1901,  when  the  Republicans 
were  unusually  well  organized  for  the  local  campaign,  they 
had  in  Detroit  eight  hundred  volunteer  workers  or  about 
seven  men  in  every  precinct;121  and  in  1908  the  Wayne 

118  A  Detroit  manager  of  considerable  experience  believes  that  mail 
carriers  are  the  most  valuable  reporters  of  public  sentiment. 

119  Detroit  Tribune,  February  23,  November  3,  1888,  October  3,  1890. 

120  Ibid.,  October  21,  1890. 

121  Ibid.,  March  31,  1901. 


158  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [594 

County  Republican  Club  had  five  hundred  and  twenty-five 
workers  at  the  polls.122 

The  plans  of  the  Republican  state  chairman  in  1910 
embraced  the  following  details :  the  organization  of  precinct 
"Get  out  the  Vote"  clubs,  the  organization  of  the  State 
down  to  four  workers  in  each  precinct,  and  the  signing  of 
cards  by  voters  pledging  themselves  to  bring  one  voter 
to  the  polls.123  Nevertheless,  as  early  as  1896  the  use  of 
local  workers  to  get  out  the  vote  seems  to  have  declined  ;124 
and  at  the  present  time  in  many  counties  there  is  no  organ- 
ization at  all  for  that  purpose.  In  Detroit  the  election-day 
organizations  are  made  up  largely  of  the  candidates' 
personal  machines.  Parties  in  Michigan,  on  account  of 
their  discrepancy  in  numbers,  have  not  made  much  effort 
to  get  absentee  voters  home  to  vote.  County  chairmen, 
cooperating  with  college  clubs,  have  sometimes  paid  the 
travelling  expenses  of  students;  and  a  law  enacted  in  1915 
makes  it  possible  for  voters  in  the  military  service,  members 
of  the  legislature  in  attendance  at  the  capitol,  commercial 
travellers,  and  students  to  vote  by  mail.125  The  corrupt 
practice  act  of  1913  made  the  payment  of  election  day 
workers  unlawful.128 

Delivering  the  Vote. — Many  of  these  workers  have  been 
paid  and  are  still  paid,  not  for  getting  out  the  vote  but  for 
delivering  the  vote.  Indeed,  payments  to  get  voters  to  the 
polls  or  to  hand  out  cards  on  election  day  constituted  an  evil 
chiefly  because  in  many  cases  the  payment  was  simply  a 
bribe  to  secure  the  worker's  influence  and  not  his  legitimate 
services.  When  campaign  money  was  plentiful  it  attracted 
many  "strikers"  and  "heelers,"  petty  precinct  workers, 
saloon  hangers-on,  and  loafers,  who  claimed  that  they  could 
deliver  a  number  of  votes  and  who  asked  payment  for  per- 

122  Detroit  Free  Press,  November  18,  1908. 

123  Detroit  News,  October  II,  1910. 

124  Ibid.,  January  20,  1896. 

125  Public  Acts,  1915,  No.  270. 

126  In  Kent  County,  however,  Democrats  assert  that  an  item  of 
$848.68  charged  in  the  1914  Republican  statement  to  "the  distribution 
of  posters,  literature,  and  banners,"  was  in  reality  paid  to  personal 
workers. 


595]  CAMPAIGN  MANAGEMENT  AND   FINANCE  159 

forming  this  patriotic  duty.  They  were  willing  to  sell  their 
influence  to  either  side  or  to  both  sides.  A  Grand  Rapids 
politician  believes  that  in  that  city  there  are  from  three 
hundred  to  five  hundred  men  who  receive  money  for  de- 
livering votes,  each  receiving  twenty  or  twenty-five  dollars 
for  his  services.  The  rural  and  semiurban  counties  of  the 
lower  peninsula  have  been  pretty  free  from  this  species  of 
graft;  but  in  Detroit  and  to  a  less  extent  in  Grand  Rapids 
and  in  the  upper  peninsula  there  are  not  only  many  strikes 
on  the  part  of  men  who  have  no  power  to  influence  votes, 
but  there  are  many  voters  actually  controlled  by  saloon- 
keepers or  other  petty  politicians.127 

I  have  already  shown  how  the  controlled  vote  in  Detroit 
is  used  in  the  primary  to  nominate  weak  candidates  in  the 
opposition  party  and  to  aid  in  electoral  manipulation.  A 
recent  writer  in  the  Detroit  News128  estimates  that  one 
hundred  of  the  two  hundred  and  three  precincts  are  con- 
trolled more  or  less  completely,  and  that  twenty  or  thirty 
of  them  are  crooked  precincts ;  that  is,  that  they  are  delivered 
for  money.  The  secretary  of  the  Detroit  Civic  League, 
Mr.  Pliny  W.  Marsh,  states  more  conservatively  that  "there 
are  supposed  to  be  forty  such  controlled  precincts."129 
The  chief  controlling  influences  are  the  saloons,  of  which 
there  are  in  Detroit  nearly  fourteen  hundred;  and  it  is  the 
general  opinion  of  politicians  that  every  saloon  will  swing 
on  an  average  ten  votes,  making  a  total  controlled  vote  of 
about  fourteen  thousand.  A  Detroit  city  official  makes  the 
interesting  computation  that  a  man's  reelection  depends  on 
three  factors  in  about  the  following  ratio:  personal  popu- 
larity, fifty  per  cent;  control  of  the  precincts,  thirty  per 
cent;  and  efficiency,  twenty  per  cent.  Accepting  the 
above  estimate  of  the  controlled  vote  as  a  fair  one,  it  will 

127  The  hurtful  influence  of  the  saloon  in  elections  was  recognized  in 
the  first  ballot  act  of  1889,  which  provided  that  elections  should  not  be 
held  in  saloons  and  that  no  liquors  should  be  brought  into  the  polling- 
place.     Later  laws  have  provided  that  saloons  shall  be  closed  on  elec- 
tion days. 

128  January  3,  1916. 

129  Government  by  Controlled  Precincts,   Pamphlet  published  by 
Detroit  Citizens'  League.     Cf.  Detroit  Free  Press,  July  25,  1916. 


l6o  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [596 

be  seen  that  it  is  large  enough  to  hold  the  balance  of  power 
in  most  city,  county,  and  district  elections  and  in  some 
state  elections.130 

From  the  fact  that  vote  control  is  exercised  through  the 
saloon  may  be  inferred  the  social  character  of  the  controlled 
districts.  Many  of  them  are  river  precincts,  dominated  by 
the  saloon  and  the  cheap  lodging-house  and  populated  by  a 
mass  of  itinerant  dock  and  ship  laborers  and  others,  who 
are  "floaters"  in  a  double  sense.  The  most  notorious  of 
the  river  precincts  is  Billy  Boushaw's,  the  first  precinct  of 
the  first  ward,  in  which  practically  every  vote  was  controlled 
in  the  primary  and  the  election  of  I9I4.131  Boushaw  runs  a 
saloon  and  a  lodging-house,  which  together  form  a  sort  of 
quasi-charitable  institution  for  floaters,  who  are  frankly 
and  gratefully  willing  to  vote  as  Boushaw  wants  them  to. 
The  third,  fifth,  seventh,  ninth,  and  eleventh  wards,  with 
the  largest  controlled  vote,  are  likewise  the  wards  with  the 
most  foreign-born  and  illiterate  voters.  The  ninth  ward, 
for  example,  which  the  secretary  of  the  Civic  League  classes 
with  the  wards  which  are  "pretty  nearly  hopeless,"  had  in 
1910  out  of  6639  males  of  voting  age  2016  illiterates  and 
only  883  native  whites  of  native  parentage.  It  is  worth 
remembering  also  that  50.2  per  cent,  or  a  little  over  one- 
half,  of  the  males  of  voting  age  in  Detroit  are  foreign-born, 
and  of  these  12.4  per  cent  are  illiterate. 

In  the  upper  peninsula,  where  the  foreign-born  and  the 
illiterate  are  numerous,  there  has  been  a  pretty  thorough 
control  exercised  by  the  mining  interests  and  the  saloons. 
According  to  a  Democratic  politician  of  good  standing, 
representatives  of  the  mining  interests  told  the  Democrats 
in  1908  that  they  would  like  to  deliver  the  foreign  vote  to 
Hemans,  the  Democratic  candidate  for  governor,  and  to 
Taft;  but  they  were  afraid  that  if  they  tried  to  do  so  the 
whole  vote  would  go  to  Hemans  and  Bryan,  since  the  voters 
were  too  ignorant  to  split  their  tickets. 

Although  it  is  true  that  at  times  the  controlled  precincts 

180  Detroit  News,  January  5,  1916. 
131  See  above,  page  106. 


597]  CAMPAIGN  MANAGEMENT   AND   FINANCE  l6l 

vote  for  different  candidates  and  to  some  extent  neutralize 
one  another,  they  are  in  most  cases  pretty  thoroughly 
unified  and  throw  their  entire  strength  to  one  side.  Prob- 
ably the  chief  unifying  factor  is  the  Royal  Ark,  an  organ- 
ization of  retail  liquor  dealers,  which  appoints  ward  captains 
and  endorses  candidates.132 

In  the  price  paid  for  the  precinct  the  saloon  license  is 
usually  an  item ;  in  addition  there  may  be  a  money  payment 
or  a  petty  job.133  The  chief  Democratic  politician  and 
reputed  leader  of  the  bipartisan  combination  is  a  judge  of 
the  Recorder's  Court,  a  man  eminently  respectable  in 
private  life  and  in  some  respects  a  man  of  ideals  in  public 
life;  his  chief  henchman,  the  chairman  of  the  Democratic 
county  committee,  is  a  young  lawyer  who  handles  an 
exceptionally  large  number  of  criminal  cases;  and,  according 
to  an  ex-prosecutor  of  Wayne  County,  eighty-eight  per  cent 
of  the  criminals  are  connected  in  some  way  with  the  saloons. 
Of  course  there  is  nothing  formal  with  respect  to  the  ar- 
rangements for  controlling  and  delivering  the  precinct  vote. 
The  candidate  may  frequent  the  saloons,  not  necessarily 
to  drink  but  to  make  friends  and  to  "set  'em  up";  there 
may  be  a  tacit  understanding  that  favors  on  election  day 
will  be  rewarded  later;  and  word  may  be  passed  along  that 
.he  is  "right"  and  a  "good  fellow." 

On  election  day  there  are  four  chief  methods  of  influencing 
and  delivering  the  vote:  friendly  persuasion,  bribery,  assis- 
tance in  marking  ballots,  and  fraud  on  the  part  of  the 
election  board.  Bribery  diminished  greatly  with  the  adop- 
tion of  the  secret  ballot,134  and  has  since  steadily  decreased ; 
but  it  still  persists  among  the  foreign-born,  the  negroes,  the 
illiterate,  and  the  morally  submerged.  The  buying  of  votes 

132  In  the  primary  campaign  of   1916  it  endorsed  candidates  for 
governor  and  lieutenant-governor.     "The  Royal  Ark — the  organized 
booze  ring  of  Detroit — is  the  most  vicious  factor  in  our  politics  today; 
not  satisfied  with  Detroit  control  they  want  to  run  the  state  of  Michigan" 
(Political  advertising  of  F.  B.  Leland,  newspapers,  August  28,  1916). 

133  Detroit  has  issued  twice  as  many  saloon  licenses  as  the  state 
law  permits. 

134  For  instances  of  early  bribery  in  Michigan,  see  Jenks,  pp.  945, 
947,  949- 

II 


1 62  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [598 

in  the  smaller  cities  and  in  the  normal  counties  practically 
came  to  an  end  ten  or  twelve  years  ago. 

Wherever  there  are  many  illiterates  the  assisting  of 
voters  in  the  booth  permits  the  precinct  boss  to  see  that  the 
ballots  are  marked  as  he  wants  them  marked.  In  some  of 
the  controlled  precincts  as  many  as  seventy-five  per  cent  of 
the  voters  are  assisted  in  marking  their  ballots,  and  assisting 
is  now  one  of  the  most  serious  evils  in  Detroit  elections. 
Prior  to  1915  the  law  provided  that  any  man  professing  to 
be  illiterate  or  physically  disabled  might  ask  for  and  receive 
assistance  in  marking  his  ballot  by  some  member  of  the 
election  board.  An  improved  law  passed  in  1915  places 
restrictions  on  assistance,  and  prescribes  that  the  assisted 
voter  shall  swear  either  that  he  cannot  read  English  or  that 
he  is  physically  disabled;  that  the  election  officers  shall  keep 
a  list  of  the  persons  assisted,  with  the  reasons  for  the  as- 
sistance; and  that  all  ballots  cast  by  assisted  voters  shall 
be  marked  for  identification,  as  in  the  case  of  a  challenged 
vote.135 

The  evil  of  assisted  voting  can  be  minimized  by  restricting 
the  circumstances  under  which  assistance  may  be  given ;  for 
example,  by  prohibiting  the  assisting  of  any  voter  not 
physically  disabled,  as  was  proposed  by  a  member  of  the 
constitutional  convention  in  1907,  or  by  insuring  the  super- 
vision of  the  marking  of  the  ballot  by  a  hostile  partisan  or 
non-partisan  witness.  The  law  has  aimed  at  oversight  of 
assistance  by  providing  that  the  marking  of  the  ballot 
should  be  observed  by  a  challenger  of  another  party.  To 
guard  the  party's  interests  at  the  polls,  accordingly,  each 
party,  and  at  times  other  organizations,  have  selected  chal- 
lengers, ordinarily  one  or  two  for  each  precinct,  the  chairman 
of  the  party  committee  providing  them  with  credentials  and 
in  some  cases  assembling  them  before  the  election  for  careful 
instruction.  The  challenger's  duty  was  not  always  simply 
to  check  illegal  voting,  but  was  also  sometimes  to  bluff  and 
intimidate  voters,  or  by  indiscriminate  challenging  to  delay 
the  voting.  Bipartisanship  in  the  city  of  Detroit,  however, 

u*  Civic  Searchlight  (Detroit),  May,  1915;  Public  Acts,  1915, 
No.  141. 


599]  CAMPAIGN   MANAGEMENT  AND  FINANCE  163 

practically  made  the  legal  provision  for  oversight  of  as- 
sistance by  challengers  a  dead  letter;  and  the  further  pro- 
vision that  civic  organizations  might  put  challengers  in  the 
booths  was  usually  nullified  by  the  refusal  of  the  election 
board  to  accept  credentials  issued  by  these  organizations  and 
by  the  lack  of  support  on  the  part  of  the  police.  The  law  of 
1915  provides  that  challengers  appointed  by  civic  organ- 
izations shall  present  their  credentials  to  the  city  clerk,  who 
shall  send  certified  copies  of  the  credentials  to  the  election 
boards.  If  the  police  commissioner  cooperates  in  enforcing 
the  new  provision  it  will  do  much  to  minimize  the  evils 
arising  from  assistance,  as  well  as  other  election  frauds;  if 
police  support  is  not  accorded,  civic  organization  represen- 
tatives will  be  excluded  from  the  booths  as  they  have  been 
in  the  past. 

A  fourth  method  of  delivering  the  vote  is  by  means  of 
fraud  on  the  part  of  the  election  board ;  for  in  the  controlled 
precincts  the  election  board  consists  very  often  of  the 
precinct  boss  and  his  henchmen.  The  election  board  of  six 
members  is  named  at  the  direct  primary,  three  from  each 
party;  and  since  they  count  the  ballots  at  the  primary  as 
well  as  at  the  election  they  are  able  by  fraud  to  continue 
themselves  in  office  almost  indefinitely,  and  the  bipartisan 
character  of  the  boards  is  of  no  practical  importance.  In 
the  general  election  of  1914  the  board  in  Batty  McGraw's 
precinct,  the  fourth  of  the  ninth  ward,  consisted  of  a 
saloonkeeper  with  his  two  bartenders,  another  saloonkeeper 
with  his  bartender,  and  a  machinist.  At  the  election  of 
1914  this  board  practiced  apparently  every  known  kind  of 
election-day  fraud,  including  remarking  ballots  and  voting 
absentees.136  It  is  impossible  to  say  to  what  extent  the 

13t  Government  by  Controlled  Precincts.  "Among  numerous  frauds 
practiced  and  of  which  we  had  tangible  evidence  was  the  changing  of 
marks  placed  on  the  ballots  by  the  voter,  the  marking  of  ballots  for 
candidates  for  whom  no  vote  had  been  cast  by  the  voter,  the  fraudulent 
entry  of  names  on  the  poll-book  of  men  who  had  not  actually  voted,  the 
voting  of  men  no  longer  resident  in  the  city,  the  illegal  marking  of  bal- 
lots for  the  voters  by  election  officers  on  the  ruse  that  the  voter  could 
not  himself  mark  his  ballot,  and  a  great  variety  of  others  "(Third  Annual 
Report  Secretary  Detroit  Citizens'  League,  in  Civic  Searchlight,  June, 


1 64  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN   MICHIGAN  [60O 

election  boards  have  carried  their  fraudulent  practices,  but 
what  happened  in  McGraw's  precinct  is  typical  of  what 
happened  in  thirty  or  forty  other  precincts.  Congressman 
Crampton  believes  that  the  defeat  of  woman  suffrage  in 
November,  1912,  by  the  narrow  majority  of  seven  hundred 
and  sixty  in  a  total  vote  of  about  half  a  million  was  due  to 
manipulation  by  Detroit  election  boards.137 

A  change  in  the  method  of  selecting  election  boards  has 
long  been  demanded  and  is  embodied  in  a  charter  amend- 
ment which  was  adopted  by  popular  vote  at  the  1916  pri- 
mary. This  amendment,  which  was  initiated  by  the  Citi- 
zens' League  and  formulated  by  a  Citizens'  Charter  Com- 
mittee appointed  by  the  mayor,  creates  a  city  election 
commission  composed  of  the  city  clerk,  the  corporation 
counsel,  the  senior  police  justice,  the  recorder,  and  the 
president  of  the  civil  service  commission.  This  new  com- 
mission will  appoint  for  each  election  district  three  regis- 
trars and  three  inspectors  of  elections;  the  latter  must  be 
resident  electors  "  who  hold  no  other  public  office  or  em- 
ployment, and  who  are  of  good  moral  character,  able  to 
read  fluently  and  write  legibly  the  English  language,  who 
are  familiar  with  the  four  fundamental  rules  of  arithmetic 
and  who  are  mentally  and  physically  fit  to  discharge  the 
duties  of  their  office."138  The  election  boards  will  be 
chosen  by  lot  from  a  list  of  fifteen  hundred  men.  The  elec- 
tion commission  will  have  power  to  reassign,  remove,  or 
prosecute  registrars  and  inspectors,  to  purge  the  registration 
rolls,  to  change  the  boundaries  of  election  districts,  and  to 
act  as  a  board  of  city  canvassers.  The  Citizens'  League 
hopes  that  this  charter  amendment  will  abolish  the  con- 
trolled precinct;  for  "it  interferes  with  the  activities  of  the 
precinct  gang  by  making  it  impossible  for  them  to  know  with 
whom  they  are  to  work  on  election  day.  ...  It  aims  to 
prevent  frauds  being  committed  instead  of  permitting  them 
and  then  attempting  to  prosecute  the  guilty  parties  after- 
wards."139 

137  Letter  of  February  8,  1916. 

138  Charter  Amendment,  Sec.  III. 

139  Civic  Searchlight,  July,  August,  1916. 


6OI]  CAMPAIGN   MANAGEMENT  AND  FINANCE  165 

Since  the  enactment  of  the  first  secret  ballot  act  in  1889 
conditions  surrounding  the  casting  and  counting  of  the 
ballots  have  vastly  improved.  Prior  to  that  law  a  large 
amount  of  party  activity  was  concentrated  at  the  polls. 
Tickets  were  printed  by  the  party  and  distributed  at  the 
polls  by  its  workers,  votes  were  bought  openly  and  delivered 
in  full  sight  of  the  buyer,  and  often  bogus  Republican  tickets 
were  circulated  by  Democrats,  or  vice  versa.140  The  first 
election  after  the  law  was  passed  was  much  quieter  and  more 
orderly  than  preceding  elections;141  and  the  law  of  1891, 
prescribing  that  ballots  should  be  printed  at  state  expense, 
brought  further  improvement. 

The  decline  in  partisanship,  many  indications  of  which 
have  been  noted,  asserts  itself  in  an  increasing  number  of 
split  tickets.  In  controlled  precincts  ticket-splitting  may 
be  an  evidence  of  vote-trading,  of  dependence  rather  than 
independence;  but  outside  of  these  precincts  it  is  in  general 
a  sign  of  healthy  discrimination  and  independent  judgment. 
The  attitude  of  party  organizations  themselves  toward 
ticket-splitting  has  changed.  In  1888  a  Democratic  poli- 
tician in  Detroit  offered  a  one  hundred  dollar  silk  banner  to 
the  ward  club  polling  in  its  ward  the  largest  number  of 
straight  Democratic  votes;142  but  in  1912  a  Republican 
county  chairman  openly  told  men  gathered  in  public  meet- 
ings how  to  split  their  tickets  so  as  to  vote  for  Roosevelt 
presidential  electors  and  the  Republican  county  candidates ; 
and  what  was  done  openly  by  this  chairman  was  done  under 
cover  by  other  chairmen.  Even  the  Republican  state 
chairman  in  1912  declared  that  he  paid  little  attention  to 
Taft  in  that  campaign  but  worked  for  the  election  of  the 
state  ticket.  Twenty  years  ago  Governor  Pingree,  boasting 
of  his  independence  in  voting  and  preaching  it  as  a  civic 
duty,  was  a  political  freak;  but  today  the  public  men  are 
numerous  who  frankly  admit  that  they  usually  scratch  their 
party  ticket.  In  1896  the  Democratic  state  chairman  com- 

140  Detroit  Free  Press,  November  2,  1886,  November  5,  1888;  De- 
troit Tribune,  November  i,  1886. 

141  Detroit  Free  Press,  November  5,  1890. 

142  Ibid.,  November  5,  1888. 


1 66  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [6O2 

puted  the  number  of  doubtful  voters  in  Michigan  as  "close 
to"  fifty  thousand;143  in  1908  about  seventy-five  thousand 
voted  for  the  Republican  candidate  for  president  and  the 
Democratic  candidate  for  governor;  in  1912  there  was  an 
extraordinary  number  of  split  tickets;  and  now  some  poli- 
ticians make  the  broad  assertion  that  all  voters  are  doubtful. 

The  Vote. — Has  the  decline  in  partisanship  and  in  organ- 
ization resulted  in  a  numerical  decrease  in  the  vote?  It 
must  be  admitted  that  failure  to  go  to  the.  polls  is  not 
necessarily  a  neglect  of  civic  duty.  The  average  voter, 
whether  he  goes  to  the  polls  or  not,  is  indifferent  to  a  large 
number  of  names  on  the  ballot,  and  if  he  is  ignorant  of  the 
candidates  it  is  not  certain  that  he  discharges  his  obligations 
better  by  voting  than  by  staying  at  home.  A  decrease  in 
the  vote,  moreover,  may  represent  the  large  number  of 
ignorant  or  indifferent  voters  who,  in  a  time  of  more  effective 
party  organizations,  voted  according  to  the  general  drift  of 
opinion  or  the  behests  of  a  party  manager  rather  than 
according  to  their  own  reasoned  wills.  Furthermore,  the 
stay-at-home  vote  may  be  a  deliberate,  organized,  and 
legitimate  method  of  aiding  or  injuring  a  candidate,  and 
may  defeat  a  candidate  as  it  did  in  1890. 

It  is  not  certain,  however,  that  there  has  been  any 
decrease.  There  are  some  influences  the  effect  of  which 
should  be  to  increase  the  vote;  for  example,  the  urbanization 
of  the  State,  putting  a  larger  proportion  of  the  voters  within 
easy  reach  of  the  polling  place,  and,  similar  in  effect,  better 
roads  and  the  use  of  automobiles.  A  definite  conclusion, 
however,  is  practically  out  of  the  question.  Prior  to  1900 
the  census  reports  do  not  include  statistics  of  the  number  of 
potential  voters;  that  is,  males  over  twenty-one,  excluding 
aliens.  A  comparison  between  1900  and  1910  is  of  little 
value  because  1900  was  a  presidential  year  and  1910  an  off 
year,  and  a  year  of  Republican  apathy  besides;  so  the  fact 
that  eighty-three  per  cent  of  the  potential  voters  went  to 
the  polls  in  1900  and  only  fifty  per  cent  in  1910  is  not  prima 
facie  evidence  of  much  significance.  Moreover,  the 

143  Detroit  Tribune,  October  i,  1896. 


603]  CAMPAIGN  MANAGEMENT  AND  FINANCE  167 

weather  has  a  marked  effect  on  voting,  especially  in  the 
rural  districts.  Nevertheless  a  comparison  of  the  vote  in 
certain  counties  and  groups  of  counties  is  not  difficult  and 
yields  some  suggestive  results. 

PERCENTAGE   OF   MALES   OF   VOTING   AGE,    EXCLUDING 
ALIENS,  VOTING  IN  THE  ELECTIONS  OF  1900  AND  iQio.144 

1900  1910 

Foreign-born  and  illiterate  counties' 84.2  50.2 

Native-born  and  literate  counties6 85.3  57.1 

Rural  counties0 85.4  53.2 

Kent  County4 92.8  42.9 

Wayne  County6 77.2  45.8 

Good  wards  in  Detroit' 47-  + 

Bad  wards  in  Detroit8 46.  + 

The  State 83.5  49.9 

*Alger,  Baraga,  Iron,  Mackinac,  Cheboygan,  Presque  Isle,  and 
Schoolcraft.  These  seven  counties  had  the  largest  percentage  of  for- 
eign-born and  illiterate. 

b  Calhoun,  Hillsdale,  Ionia,  Lenawee,  Livingston,  St.  Joseph,  and 
Washtenaw.  These  seven  counties  had  the  smallest  percentage  of 
foreign-born  and  illiterate. 

c  Barry,  Clinton,  Hillsdale,  Lapeer,  Livingston,  Montcalm,  and  Van 
Buren. 

d  Containing  the  city  of  Grand  Rapids. 
e  Containing  the  city  of  Detroit. 
f  The  first,  second,  and  seventeenth. 
g  The  fifth,  seventh,  ninth,  and  eleventh. 

The  percentage  voting  was  higher  both  in  1900  and  in 
1910  in  the  seven  counties  having  fewest  foreign-born  and 
illiterates  than  in  the  seven  counties  having  the  largest 
number  of  those  persons.  The  seven  counties  most  pre- 
dominantly rural  had  a  markedly  higher  percentage  in  both 
elections  than  had  Wayne  County,  which  is  the  most  urban. 
Kent  County,  which  is  also  largely  urban,  outran  the  rural 
counties  in  1900  but  fell  behind  them  in  1910.  Altogether 
the  comparison  shows  that,  in  these  two  elections  at  least, 
the  farmers  voted  better  than  the  city  residents  and  the 
literate  better  than  the  illiterate.  It  will  be  noted  also  that 
in  1910  the  four  worst  wards  in  Detroit  cast  forty-six 
per  cent  of  their  potential  vote.  The  two  best  wards,  the 
first  and  the  second,  cast  only  forty-three  per  cent;  but  the 

144  Cf.  W.  C.  Hamm,  "A  Study  of  Presidential  Votes,"  in  Political 
Science  Quarterly,  vol.  xvi,  p.  59. 


1 68 


PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN 


[604 


seventeenth  ward,  a  district  inhabited  by  men  who  have 
given  their  names  to  automobiles  and  who  are  supposed  to 
be  especially  remiss  in  their  civic  duties,  cast  fifty-six  per 
cent  of  its  vote  and  raised  the  percentage  for  the  three  good 
wards  to  forty-seven  per  cent,  slightly  better  than  the  vote 
in  the  bad  wards. 

In  six  counties,  selected  on  account  of  their  low  percentage 
of  foreign-born,  their  slow  growth,  and  the  presumably 
constant  ratio  of  voters  to  total  population,  the  highest 
percentage  voting  in  twelve  census  years  from  1854  to  1910 
was  in  i884,146  when  the  percentages  were  so  high  that  they 
suggest  underenumeration  by  the  census-takers.  With  the 
exception  of  1890,  the  year  of  a  close  gubernatorial  contest, 
the  percentages  have  always  been  lower  in  off  years  than  in 
presidential  years.  The  lowest  percentages  were  in  1910. 146 

On  the  whole,  then,  although  it  is  possible  that  voting 
in  the  State  is  not  so  general  as  in  the  past,  the  figures  which 
have  been  presented  do  not  support  the  common  assertion, 
which  casual  observation  often  appears  to  warrant,  that  the 
best  citizens  do  not  vote  in  elections  as  faithfully  as  do  the 
worst. 

144  The  presidential  elections  of  1888,  1892,  and  1896  are  not  included 
in  the  comparison.  In  1896  the  vote  was  exceptionally  heavy. 

148  The  following  table  gives  the  percentage  of  the  total  population 
in  selected  counties  voting  in  the  census  years  from  1854  to  1910: 


Allegan 

Barry 

Calhoun 

Kalamazoo 

Kent 

Washtenaw 

1854 

20 

10 

17 

17 

17 

17 

1860 

21 

21 

22 

21 

20 

22 

1864 

18 

19 

20 

20 

19 

21 

1870 

M 

H 

15 

15 

14 

17 

1874 

15 

15 

14 

18 

14 

19 

1880 

22 

24 

23 

23 

22 

23 

1884 

31 

37 

36 

35 

34 

36 

1890 

2O 

21 

19 

22 

21 

21 

1894 

16 

22 

16 

18 

16 

22 

1900 

23 

28 

25 

25 

25 

22 

1904 

19 

26 

21 

23 

20 

22 

1910 

12 

18 

13 

14 

II 

19 

CHAPTER  VII 
CONCLUSIONS 

Although  the  great  national  party  organizations  continue 
quadrennially  to  persist  and  to  function  with  apparently 
almost  undiminished  vitality,  an  examination  of  party 
activities  in  Michigan  and  within  its  lesser  political  sub- 
divisions reveals  striking  and  significant  changes. 

Legislation. — Legislation  affecting  party  organizations  has 
passed  through  five  phases:  (i)  the  recognition  of  the  party, 
implied  or  expressed  in  the  first  primary  and  ballot  laws; 
(2)  the  control  of  elections,  the  enforcement  of  secrecy  in 
voting,  and  governmental  assumption  of  certain  party 
functions  at  the  polls,  such  as  the  printing  and  distribution 
of  ballots;  (3)  the  regulation  of  various  features  of  the  cus- 
tomary nomination  procedure;  (4)  an  awakening  to  the 
failure  of  regulation,  and  the  establishment  of  a  direct 
method  of  nomination,  including  a  considerable  simpli- 
fication of  procedure,  individual  initiative  in  candidacy, 
governmental  supervision  of  voting,  and  detailed  legal 
safeguards  which  are  not  only  included  in  the  primary  laws 
themselves  but  are  also  included  in  special  comprehensive 
corrupt  practice  acts, — all  having  the  purpose  of  intro- 
ducing popular  control  of  the  parties,  on  the  one  hand  by 
means  of  democratic  machinery  and  on  the  other  hand 
through  the  elimination  of  undemocratic  influences;  and 
(5)  the  cessation  of  wholesale  reforms,  the  appearance  of 
some  signs  of  reaction,1  and  the  beginning  of  an  era  char- 
acterized by  the  absence  of  propaganda,  denunciation,  and 
excitement,  and  by  the  amending  and  perfecting  of  old 
laws,  especially  of  corrupt  practice  laws, — these  changes 
showing  on  the  whole  a  purpose  to  encourage  the  inde- 
pendence and  the  free  expression  of  the  electorate. 

1  See  above,  page  68. 

169 


I7O  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [606 

During  the  period,  therefore,  there  has  been  a  steady 
legislative  trend  toward  governmental  control  of  the  party, 
toward  the  democratizing  of  the  organization,  toward  the 
simplification  of  party  processes,  and  toward  the  emancipa- 
tion of  the  voter  from  dependence  on  the  party  organization. 
Besides  these  laws  having  to  do  specifically  with  nomina- 
tion and  election  processes,  statutes  have  been  enacted  which 
provide,  under  limitations  which  need  not  be  explained 
here,  for  commission  government  in  cities  and  non-partisan 
municipal  elections,  for  various  non-partisan  or  bipartisan 
boards,  and  for  the  initiative,  the  referendum,  and  the  recall. 

The  laws  to  which  I  have  referred  had  to  meet  in  the 
process  of  enactment  many  difficulties  not  encountered  by 
ordinary  legislation,  especially  complications  arising  from 
the  activity  of  party  leaders.  To  one  engaged  in  drafting 
an  election  or  a  nomination  bill  a  purely  objective  point  of 
view  was  impossible;  a  legislative  enactment  was  looked 
upon  as  a  factor  in  the  next  campaign,  as  a  weapon  to  use 
against  other  parties,  or  as  a  piece  of  machinery  to  manipu- 
late. The  law  of  1891  for  the  choosing  of  presidential 
electors  by  districts,  the  anti-fusion  act  of  1 894,  the  pres- 
idential primary  law  of  1912,  and  the  central  committee 
act  of  1913  illustrate  this  lack  of  detachment  and  objectivity. 
In  a  class  of  legislation  which  seems  peculiarly  appropriate 
for  preliminary  investigation  by  a  commission  of  experts 
no  commission  was  ever  appointed,  and  possibly  no  experts 
are  to  be  found.  The  influence  of  outside  leaders  on 
members  of  the  legislature  has  been  opportunistic  and 
unscientific.  Moreover  laws  relating  to  party  organiza- 
tions have  encountered  special  difficulty  in  enforcement ;  for 
those  who  administer  the  laws  are  often  closely  affiliated 
with  those  who  break  them. 

It  appears  to  be  accepted  that  the  act  of  voting  should  be 
secret  ;2  that  election  machineiy  should  be  controlled  by  the 
government;  that  party  finance  should  be  given  publicity; 
that  corporations  should  as  far  as  possible  be  divorced  from 
party  management;  that  with  regard  to  the  election  of 

*Cf.  Croly,  p.  341. 


607]  CONCLUSIONS  171 

certain  officials, — for  example,  judicial,  educational,  and 
municipal  officers, — partisanship  should  as  far  as  possible 
be  eliminated;  and  that  in  general,  independence  should  be 
encouraged. 

On  the  other  hand  it  is  still  unsettled  whether  nominations 
should  be  direct  or  indirect ;  whether,  if  direct,  the  primary 
should  be  open  or  closed ;  what  officers  should  be  elected  and 
what  appointed;  to  what  extent  the  financial  operations  of 
parties  should  be  restricted;  and,  most  fundamental  of  all, 
whether  the  tendency  toward  the  weakening  of  state  party 
organizations  should  be  assisted  or  opposed.  Furthermore 
the  question  how  and  to  what  extent  nominating  methods 
influence  the  type  and  quality  of  candidates,  and  whether 
means  may  not  be  devised  to  induce  a  better  class  of  men 
to  offer  themselves  for  office,  seems  a  proper  subject  for 
legislative  discussion ;  but  this  subject,  admittedly  a  delicate 
one,  is  seldom  if  ever  mentioned.  It  is  not  surprising, 
therefore,  that  the  results  of  legislation  have  been  in  some 
respects  unexpected  and  in  many  respects  disappointing. 

The  sophistication  and  clarification  of  the  public  mind, 
the  growing  understanding  of  the  place  of  the  party  in 
government,  and  the  awakening  civic  conscience  which  this 
legislation  tardily  reflected  found  wholly  inadequate  ex- 
pression in  internal  party  reform.  In  a  few  cases,  it  is  true, 
local  party  organizations  attempted  to  put  into  effect  the 
principle  of  direct  nominations  prior  to  its  adoption  by  the 
legislature ;  but  in  general  those  agencies  which  are  supposed 
to  make  public  opinion  articulate  revealed  in  their  structure 
and  practice  a  most  feeble  reaction  to  the  prevailing  public 
opinion. 

Oligarchical  Tendencies.3 — This  lack  ot  response  to  public 
opinion  is  largely  explained  by  the  tendency  of  a  party  to 
adopt  or  develop  an  oligarchical  and  conservative  type  of 
organization.  Hardly  .  one  of  those  features  which  we 
commonly  associate  with  the  flexibility,  the  responsibility, 
and  the  checks  of  popular  government  could  have  been 

*  Compare  a  suggestive  discussion  of  oligarchical  tendencies  within 
political  parties  in  R.  Michels,  Political  Parties. 


PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [608 

found  in  the  party  organizations  prior  to  their  legislative 
reconstruction.  They  had  generally  nothing  in  the  nature 
of  a  constitution;  except  with  respect  to  their  nominees  they 
paid  slight  heed  to  the  idea  of  rotation  in  office ;  control  of  the 
primaries  and  of  conventions  by  office-holders  and  commit- 
teemen  led  to  cooptation  and  long  terms  ;4  there  was  almost 
no  attempt  to  establish  separation  of  powers ;  there  were  no 
two-chambered  bodies;  there  was  rarely  any  method  of 
securing  popular  control  by  means  of  initiative,  referendum, 
recall,  publicity,  submission  of  official  reports,  or  even 
removals;  party  practice  rested  largely  on  mass-action  and 
tended,  therefore,  to  necessitate  and  magnify  leadership, 
and  at  the  same  time  by  means  of  the  unit  rule,  slates, 
instructions,  the  power  of  the  chairman  and  of  committees, 
and  other  methods,  it  effectually  stifled  individual  action; 
the  principle  of  regularity  was  a  principle  of  conservatism 
and  tended  to  preserve  the  status  quo ;  party  revenues  were 
derived  from  a  few ;  the  chief  check  on  misgovernment  and 
usurpation,  a  bolt  or  an  electoral  defeat,  was  imposed  on 
the  party  from  without,  was  uncertain  in  effect,  and  con- 
stituted at  the  best  a  negative  and  illogical  corrective;  and, 
finally,  every  important  selection  in  the  organization  was 
indirect,  from  one  to  three  times  removed  from  the  people, 
and  the  personnel  of  the  conventions  which  performed  the 
selecting  function  was  unrepresentative. 

The  Democratic  organization  was  in  most  respects  as 
oligarchical  as  the  Republican;  and  the  rare  differences 
which  appear  in  the  two  organizations  were  due  to  the  con- 
trasting philosophies  of  the  two  parties,  to  their  difference 
in  numerical  strength,  or  to  adventitious  circumstances. 

The  minor  parties  have  been  more  democratic  in  their 
internal  affairs  than  have  the  major  parties;  their  conven- 
tions have  been  characterized  by  a  more  representative 

4  One  man  dominated  the  Democratic  state  organization  from  1892 
to  1908;  and  in  the  Republican  organization  the  chairman  and  the 
secretary  held  office  continuously  from  1900  to  1910.  See  above,  page 
89  and  note. 


609]  CONCLUSIONS  173 

membership,6  greater  freedom  of  individual  expression, 
fewer  instructions  and  fewer  slates,  less  evidence  of 
manipulation  and  management,  and  more  deliberation  and 
decorum;  but  these  conditions  have  arisen  from  the  fact 
that  these  parties  have  not  attracted  professional  politicians, 
wire-pullers,  and  moneyed  men,  and  have  attracted  political 
amateurs  with  a  burning  desire  for  individual  utterance. 
Their  conventions,  moreover,  have  been  small  and  in  many 
cases  mass  conventions.  Sometimes,  however,  conditions 
in  the  minor  parties  resulted  from  avowed  attempts  to 
introduce  voluntarily  more  democratic  methods.  Their 
committee  systems  have  been  constituted  exactly  or  almost 
exactly  like  those  of  the  major  parties.6 

It  is  true  that  the  party  primaries  under  the  discredited 
convention  system  of  nomination  were  in  theory  as  demo- 
cratic as  the  New  England  town-meeting;  but  in  practice 
they  more  nearly  resembled  an  eighteenth  century  election 
at  Old  Sarum.  Moreover  such  campaign  features  as  clubs, 
barbecues,  pole-raisings,  rallies,  ratifications,  and  jolli- 
fications, which  have  now  partly  or  wholly  disappeared, 
were  on  the  surface  evidences  of  local  initiative  and  popular 
participation;  but  in  fact  they  were  seldom  spontaneous, 
were  often  shams,  and  were  usually  planned  and  engineered 
by  the  party  managers. 

In  the  place  of  what  may  be  termed  the  natural  oli- 
garchic organization  of  the  party  the  direct  primary  laws 
have  introduced  artificial  democratic  machinery.  Although 
they  have  not  deposed  the  professional  manager,  they  have 
taken  from  him  his  most  prized  powers  and  have  made 
him  the  appointee  of  the  candidate,  thus  reversing  the 
former  relation.  Since  the  candidate  is  simply  a  self- 
assertive  individual  who  steps  out  of  the  ranks  and  gathers 
around  him  a  following  which  is  one  of  several  factions  and 
often  merely  a  minority  of  the  party  membership,  his  con- 

5  In  the  Peoples',  Prohibition,  and  Socialist  parties  women  have 
appeared  in  conventions  and  committees;  in  the  Prohibition  party 
clergymen  have  been  active;  and  in  Progressive  conventions  doctors 
were  conspicuous,  three  classes  seldom  taking  a  noticeable  part  in  the 
work  of  major  party  organizations. 

6  With  the  exception  of  the  Socialist  Labor  party. 


174  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN  [6lO 

trol  is  ephemeral  and  decentralizing  and  encourages  in- 
subordination. From  the  point  of  view  of  the  politician 
who  had  under  the  convention  system  of  nomination  op- 
portunity for  secret  counsel  and  for  the  development  of 
strategic  policy,  direct  nominations  are  haphazard,  in- 
efficient, and  anarchic.  Recent  legislation  has  done  away 
with  the  town-meeting  type  of  self-government  by  localities 
and  with  mass  action,  and  has  set  up  in  its  place  a  direct 
democracy  of  petitions  and  ballots.  Where  there  are  few 
contests  for  nominations,  as  in  the  Democratic  and  minor 
parties,  oligarchical  management  tends  to  persist,  char- 
acterized by  centralized  control  of  nominations,  permanency 
of  tenure  of  party  officials,  slight  popular  participation  in 
the  primaries,  and  the  advantages  of  efficient  and  tactical 
management.7  In  the  majority  party,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  people  have  their  way,  obtaining  results  that  often  dis- 
satisfy themselves  and  disgust  the  politician. 

The  direct  primary  will  not  achieve  its  democratizing 
purpose  if  it  is  capable  of  yielding  in  the  major  parties  to 
the  oligarchical  tendencies  which  have  appeared  heretofore 
in  every  party  organization.  To  make  impossible  the  de- 
velopment of  oligarchy  it  would  seem  necessary  not  only 
to  impose  new  machinery  on  the  party,  but  also  to  remove 
those  conditions  out  of  which  oligarchical  control  naturally 
grows.  Among  these  conditions  are  human  nature  and 
the  personal,  feudalistic  ties  of  friendship,  charity,  mutual 
aid,  and  patronage;  social  heterogeneity;  the  adaptation  of 
party  machinery  to  a  variety  of  political  subdivisions;  the 
indifference  of  the  masses  to  party  functions;  the  multi- 
plicity of  offices;  financial  resources  contributed  and  spent 
by  a  few;  and  the  practical  demands  of  strategy  and  efficient 
management. 

Legislation  has  greatly  restricted  the  power  of  those  who 
contribute  and  spend  the  party  revenue;  it  ignores  for  the 
higher  offices  political  subdivisions  like  wards,  townships, 
and  counties;  and  it  has  considerably  increased  the  interest 
of  the  rank  and  file  of  the  party.  In  so  far  as  it  has  done 

7  See  above,  page  12 iff. 


6ll]  CONCLUSIONS  175 

these  things  it  has  apparently  removed  some  of  the  root 
causes  of  oligarchy.  The  increasing  number  of  small 
financial  contributions,  for  example,  is  an  indication  of  the 
democratic  counter-tendency.  But,  on  the  other  hand, 
legislation  has  not  yet  grappled  with  human  nature  or  the 
personal  feudalistic  ties;  social  heterogeneity  due  to  immi- 
gration and  urbanization  seems  to  be  increasing  rather  than 
decreasing;  the  ballot  is  becoming  longer  rather  than 
shorter;  and  as  long  as  parties  are  fighting  organizations 
they  tend  to  develop  arrangements  best  adapted  to  tactical 
and  efficient  management. 

Where  the  party  is  a  truly  responsible  agent  in  govern- 
ment the  correct  theory  seems  to  be  that  the  act  of  nomi- 
nation is  not  only  an  act  of  tentative  appointment  to  public 
office,  an  appointment  subject  to  popular  confirmation,  but 
is  also  an  act  of  quasi-legislation :  the  selecting  of  that  which 
shall  be  a  voice  and  an  embodiment  of  party  principles. 
Nomination,  therefore,  viewed  from  the  standpoint  of  an 
insider,  one  who  is  immediately  concerned  with  party 
welfare,  is  a  commissioning  not  so  much  to  do  certain  things 
as  to  represent  certain  things  and  to  make  a  particular 
appeal.  In  the  past  a  man  of  commanding  personality  has 
sometimes  captured  a  party  and  impressed  his  own  ideas 
upon  it,  and  wealthy  candidates  have  bought  nominations; 
but  when  making  their  nominations  consistently  with  the 
logic  of  party  government  leaders  have  preferred  a  man  who 
could  at  once  speak  without  the  embarrassment  of  a  contra- 
dictory past  that  which  party  traditions  and  party  strategy 
seemed  to  demand.  The  party,  when  directed  by  able 
generals,  has  usually  preferred  a  conforming  man,  a  regular, 
sometimes  a  silent  man.  Under  these  conditions  the  act  of 
nomination  is  a  final  act  of  party  policy,  the  rerooting  of  an 
old  organization  in  new  electoral  soil.  A  candidate  is 
expected  not  only  to  capture  an  office,  but  to  repair  and 
strengthen  the  party  structure  without  altering  its  founda- 
tions. Moreover,  as  has  been  pointed  out,  the  act  of  nomi- 
nation is  a  move  on  the  political  battlefield,  and  is  con- 
ditioned not  only  by  the  traditions  and  the  internal  re- 


176  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [6 1 2 

quirements  of  the  party  but  by  the  manoeuvres  of  its 
enemy.  Accordingly  government  by  parties  appears  to 
suggest  that  nomination  should  not  be  spontaneous  and 
popular  but  should  be  a  delegated  and  specialized  function. 

The  work  of  organization,  nomination,  and  management 
has  demanded  and  developed  specialists  with  their  own  dis- 
tinctive methods,  codes  of  honor,  terminology,  and  short- 
comings. The  present  tendency,  however,  is  to  drive 
specialization  out  of  this  field,  in  contrast  with  the  trend  in 
other  fields  and  in  other  departments  of  politics  toward 
increasing  specialization.  The  party  organization  secured 
its  strength,  unity,  and  efficiency  at  the  price  of  popular 
control.  Recent  legislation,  in  stressing  popular  control, 
sacrifices  unity  and  efficiency.  The  problem  of  party  organ- 
ization, therefore,  if  parties  are  to  be  preserved,  is  the 
problem  of  reconciling  democracy  with  efficiency. 

The  short  ballot  in  state  and  local  elections  will,  by  doing 
away  with  the  multiplicity  of  offices,  remove  one  of  the  root 
causes  of  strong  centralized  party  organization,  and  in  this 
respect  it  is  strictly  in  line  with  other  recent  legislative 
tendencies.  The  numerous  elective  offices  in  the  State, 
counties,  and  cities  have  been  used,  like  the  appointive 
offices,  to  reward  the  party  workers ;  and  the  fact  that  in  the 
case  of  the  elective  officers  the  appointment  has  been  made 
before  the  election  has  been  a  negligible  check  on  the  party 
leaders,  because  in  most  cases  the  head  of  the  ticket  is  the 
only  candidate  whose  subjection  to  popular  criticism  and 
confirmation  is  anything  more  than  an  empty  form.8 
These  various  elective  state  and  county  offices  have  had  no 
necessary  relation  to  the  objective  realization  of  party 
purposes,  but  have  been  used  to  keep  a  working  organization 
alive  and  to  give  it  local  rooting.  If  these  offices  are  made 
appointive  instead  of  elective  they  may  be  used  somewhat 
more  effectively  as  rewards,  and  may  stimulate  more  fealty 
and  industry  within  the  organization,  since  the  payment 

8  The  Socialists  recognize  the  real  location  of  the  appointing  power, 
and  carry  party  government  to  its  logical  conclusion  when  they  require 
their  candidates  to  deposit  their  resignations  with  the  party  officials. 


613]  CONCLUSIONS  177 

will  not  be  made  until  after  the  work  is  done ;  but  in  general 
their  usefulness  to  the  party  will  be  little  affected.  If  the 
party,  however,  is  deprived  by  a  merit  system  of  the  power 
to  give  these  offices,  its  resources  will  necessarily  suffer. 
The  short  ballot,  moreover,  in  magnifying  the  importance 
and  the  attractiveness  of  a  few  elective  offices  will  be  likely 
to  encourage  contests  and  factions,  to  make  discriminating 
voting  and  the  splitting  of  tickets  easier  and  more  common, 
and  to  encourage  to  become  candidates  a  class  of  men  who 
will  adopt  non-partisan  standards  of  appointment  and  in 
other  respects  act  independently  of  the  party  managers. 

There  are  in  spite  of  democratizing  legislation  many  in- 
dications in  Michigan  of  the  continued  existence  or  the 
recrudescence  of  oligarchical  organization ;  and  the  purpose 
of  this  legislation,  however  valid  that  purpose  may  be,  will 
be  defeated  if  the  machinery  which  it  sets  up  can  be  so 
manipulated  as  to  prevent  public  opinion  from  securing 
faithful  expression  in  nominations  and  elections.  With 
more  complicated  machinery,  more  legal  prohibitions  and 
penalties,  more  publicity,  a  generally  higher  standard  of 
political  morality,  and  greater  independence  on  the  part 
of  newspapers  and  of  the  electorate,  methods  of  control 
and  manipulation  have  changed.  Under  the  old  regime 
there  was  more  downright  buying  and  selling  of  votes  and 
influence,  more  intimidation,  more  use  of  force,  more  deft 
resort  to  the  apathy  of  the  intelligent  and  to  the  pliability 
of  the  ignorant,  more  crude  appeals  to  shibboleths  and  to 
personal  and  party  loyalty.  The  success  of  the  manager 
under  the  old  system  may  find  a  partial  explanation  in  the 
psychology  of  the  crowd;  for  every  convention  was  a  crowd. 
The  direct  primary,  however,  has  separated  the  crowd  into 
individuals,  who  must  be  acted  upon  more  subtly  by 
methods  which  deceive  the  intellect  rather  than  by  those 
which  arouse  the  emotions.  The  politicians  have  had  too 
short  a  time  to  adapt  themselves  to  changed  machinery; 
but  the  new  methods  of  control  and  manipulation  show 
themselves  with  some  clearness  in  Detroit.  In  view  of  the 
12 


178  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN   MICHIGAN  [614 

fact  that  the  control  of  the  vote  in  Detroit  is  largely  based 
on  personal  allegiance,  it  is  significant  that  the  movement 
against  this  control  is  accompanied  by  a  movement  for 
non-partisan  city  elections.  Theoretically,  non-partisan- 
ship does  not  necessarily  imply  the  destruction  of  the 
feudalistic  element  which  lies  at  the  base  of  the  control  and 
manipulation  of  votes,  and  in  practice  it  may  even  accen- 
tuate the  influence  of  that  element.  Nevertheless,  the 
adoption  of  the  machinery  of  non-partisanship  presumes  a 
frank  and  intelligent  facing  of  facts,  a  recognition  and  an 
employment  of  the  forces  which  actually  determine  elec- 
tions, and  a  state  of  mind  on  the  part  of  the  public  which 
in  its  essence  is  hostile  to  all  kinds  of  blind  and  unreasoning 
allegiance,  personal  as  well  as  partisan. 

Popular  Attitude  Toward  Parties. — Public  opinion  has  not 
only  criticised  the  internal  arrangements  and  functioning 
of  the  party,  but  has  also  with  growing  boldness  questioned 
the  right  of  the  party  itself  to  exist.  Formerly  it  seems  to 
have  been  widely  felt  that  the  party  was  an  end  as  well  as  a 
means,  and  that  it  was  something  to  which  a  citizen  owed 
obligations.  Conditions  under  which  the  politicians  and 
many  of  the  voters  of  a  quarter  of  a  century  ago  cast  their 
first  ballots  tended  to  raise  partisanship  to  a  level  with 
religion  and  to  make  it  synonymous  with  patriotism.  The 
habit  of  calling  to  the  aid  of  the  party  a  past  which  was 
unchanging  and  was  rich  in  emotional  appeal  was  fruitful 
in  unifying  and  disciplining  effects.  With  the  passing  of 
Civil  War  tradition  the  time  became  ripe  for  an  under- 
standing of  the  true  place  of  the  party  and  of  the  realities 
of  its  organization. 

In  1891  the  Democratic  Free  Press  declared  editorially: 
"The  prohibition  which  the  Governor  urges  on  ticket- 
peddling  outside  the  booths  is  pretty  near  the  line  of  undue 
interference  with  the  freedom  of  the  voter,  but  we  think, 
on  the  whole,  it  may  be  a  justifiable  interference."9  In 
1894  the  Republican  Tribune  delivered  this  editorial  pro- 
nouncement: "The  bolter  is  essentially  a  political  free- 

9  January  15,  1891. 


615]  CONCLUSIONS  179 

booter.  .  .  .  Men  treat  party  affiliation  too  lightly.  It  is 
a  sentiment  as  honorable  as  patriotism,  and  its  preservation 
is  scarcely  less  important.  .  .  .  There  is  no  difference  in 
kind  between  the  person  who,  if  he  is  defeated  at  the  polls, 
secedes  from  the  government,  and  him  who,  having  got 
the  worst  of  it  in  a  convention,  bolts."10  On  the  eve  of  the 
1896  campaign  this  same  paper  declared:  "We  should  say 
that  the  first  test  of  a  Republican  aspirant  for  office  was 
not  the  test  of  his  belief  in  regard  to  the  tariff  or  in  regard 
to  silver,  but  the  test  of  his  unwavering  determination  to 
support  the  ticket  nominated,  whether  it  included  himself 
or  not."11  Even  as  late  as  1903  a  member  of  the  legislature 
said :  "The  Colby  bill  seeks  to  dictate  the  machinery  of  party 
organization.  .  .  .  An  unwarranted  interference  in  non- 
governmental functions."12  Statements  such  as  these  sound 
strangely  foreign  today,  for  public  opinion  and  legislation, 
the  first  phase  of  which  was  to  recognize  parties,  are  now 
in  their  present  phase  attempting  to  induce  the  voter  not 
to  recognize  them. 

Growth  of  Independence. — Independence,  the  mental  atti- 
tude which  dominates  public  opinion  and  legislation,  may 
manifest  itself  in  doubtfulness,  in  a  disinclination  to  confess 
allegiance  to  a  party,  in  the  splitting  of  tickets,  in  bolting, 
third-party  movements,  and  local  independent  parties,  or 
in  apathy  and  indifference  to  party  activities.  The  passing 
of  tradition,  the  secret  ballot,  the  abuses  of  oligarchical 
control  and  popular  understanding  of  these  abuses,  the 
corrupt  influence  of  corporations,  federal  civil  service 
reform,  the  direct  primary,  the  disappearance  of  party 
issues,  the  stressing  of  efficiency  and  business  administra- 
tions, the  supplanting  in  political  discussion  of  constitu- 
tional and  governmental  questions  by  social  and  economic 
questions,13  each  of  these  has  contributed  to  the  increase 
of  independence.  Of  similar  effect  have  been  specific 
events,  such  as  the  epochal  campaign  of  1896  with  its 

"September  18,  1894. 

11  March  28,  1896. 

12  Detroit  Tribune,  April  9,  1903. 
18  Cf.  Haynes,  pp.  472-475. 


ISO  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN  MICHIGAN  [6 1 6 

breaking  of  old  allegiances,  the  fusions  of  that  and  subse- 
quent campaigns  with  disregard  of  party  lines  and  cheap- 
ening of  party  names,  the  formation  of  the  Progressive  party 
in  1912,  and  such  recent  movements  as  those  for  socialism, 
trade  unionism,  prohibition,  and  woman  suffrage,  forming 
strong  organizations  outside  of  the  old  parties  and  engrossing 
the  enthusiasm,  loyalty,  and  resources  of  many  voters. 
Practically  all  forms  of  independence  have  become  in- 
creasingly evident  in  Michigan  politics.  Nowadays  a  can- 
didate's record  as  a  strict  party  man  appears  to  be  of  little 
importance.14 

Legislation  has  assisted  independence  by  providing  for 
blank  spaces  on  the  ballot  on  which  the  names  of  indepen- 
dent candidates  might  be  written  or  pasted,  for  the  use  of 
the  direct  primary  by  new  parties  or  by  independent  or- 
ganizations, for  non-partisan  boards,  for  the  admission  to 
the  polls  of  challengers  appointed  by  civic  organizations,  and 
for  non-partisan  elections  in  cities  having  the  commission  or 
manager  form  of  government.  For  a  considerable  time 
most  villages  and  some  townships  have  in  their  elections 
disregarded  party  distinctions,  and  in  cities  other  than 
those  with  commission  or  manager  charters  and  in  various 
judicial  circuits  the  voters  have  at  times  ignored  party  lines. 
Citizens'  parties  first  became  conspicuous  in  local  elections 
about  1900.  In  1906,  with  no  legalized  non-partisan 
machinery,  out  of  fifty-seven  elected  mayors  twelve  were 
non-partisan.15  In  1907  there  were  two  parties  in  the 
Grand  Rapids  primary,  the  Liberal  and  the  Church,  a 
division  not  uncommon  in  city  and  village  elections,  along 
moral  rather  than  political  lines.16  The  disadvantages  of 
the  party-column  ballot  were  pointed  out  by  the  attorney- 
general  in  i895;17  ten  years  later  the  office-column  ballot 
was  advocated  by  newspapers,  municipal  reformers,  and 
members  of  the  legislature;18  and  in  1913  this  method  of 

14  See  above,  page  165. 

16  Detroit  Free  Press,  April  4,  1906. 

16  Grand  Rapids  Herald,  March  II,  1907. 

17  Report,  1895,  P-  158. 

™  Detroit  Tribune,  March  n,  May  2,  5,  1905. 


617]  CONCLUSIONS  l8l 

encouraging  independence  was  recommended  by  Governor 
Ferris. 

The  growth  of  independence,  with  the  retention  and  legal- 
ization of  party  organizations ,  complicates  nomination .  The 
closed  primary  would  seem  incompatible  with  the  existence 
of  a  large  number  of  independent  voters,  for  it  practically 
excludes  them  from  any  part  in  the  nominating  process; 
and,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  absolutely  closed  primary  has 
been  abandoned  in  Michigan.  On  the  other  hand,  under 
the  open  primary  there  are  two  evident  results :  The  candi- 
dates in  bidding  for  the  independent  vote  emphasize  their 
own  independence,  and  the  voters  in  crossing  and  recrossing 
party  lines  tend  to  obliterate  those  lines. 

Weakening  of  Party  Organizations. — Among  the  many 
symptoms  of  a  decline  in  strength  of  party  organizations 
are  factionalism;  decreasing  campaign  expenditure;  fewer 
party  clubs,  speakers  and  gatherings;  disappearance  of 
party  organs,  bipartisan  combinations,  and  vote-trading; 
insubordination,  indifferent  committees,  fewer  workers,  and 
a  general  lack  of  unity,  loyalty,  and  enthusiasm.  As  a 
matter  of  fact  the  government  of  the  State  is  not  true  party 
government.  Caught,  therefore,  between  legislation  which 
saps  its  vitality  and  cripples  its  action  and  an  independent 
opinion  which  either  ignores  it  or  seeks  openly  to  destroy  it, 
the  party  can  get  little  support  from  the  fact  that,  considered 
purely  as  a  state  organization,  it  is  based  on  artificial  dis- 
tinctions and  serves  few  useful  purposes  in  legislation  or 
administration.  The  initiative  and  the  referendum,  which 
have  been  adopted  in  Michigan,  are  non-partisan  devices, 
and  are  a  confession  that  the  party  organization  has  been 
found  an  inadequate  agency  for  the  embodiment  of  opinion 
into  law.  The  effect  of  these  devices  on  party  organizations 
cannot  fail  to  be  weakening.19  Parties  are  originally 
created  by  issues;  and  the  strength  of  party  organizations 
depends  to  a  considerable  degree  on  the  differentiation  of 
party  tenets.  The  state  party  organization  as  such  derives 

19  J.  D.  Barnett,  The  Operation  of  the  Initiative,  Referendum  and 
Recall  in  Oregon,  pp.  185-186. 


1 82  PARTY  ORGANIZATION  IN  MICHIGAN  [6 1 8 

little  strength  from  the  advocacy  of  characteristic  ideas 
growing  out  of  state  conditions,  and  the  disappearance  or 
confusion  of  national  issues  is  an  additional  and  important 
cause  for  the  weakening  of  state  party  organizations. 

Among  the  benefits  which  accrued  from  strong  party 
organizations  not  the  least  was  their  service  in  helping  to 
make  politically  homogeneous  the  heterogeneous  elements 
of  the  population  which  have  resulted  from  immigration 
and  from  industrial  and  social  differentiation.  In  Michigan 
the  parties  have  represented  vertical  divisions;  they  have 
in  general  cut  athwart  races,  religions,  and  economic  classes, 
and  they  have  led  various  groups  to  some  measure  of  cooper- 
ation and  common  feeling.  The  heterogeneous  character 
of  city  populations,  unaided  by  other  influences,  would 
probably  have  developed  the  strong  oligarchical  type  of 
party  organization;20  and  this  type  of  organization  was  the 
one  best  fitted  to  deal  with  city  populations.  The  managers 
not  only  drew  the  foreign-born  into  the  ordinary  political 
activities  but  also  guided  them  through  the  intricacies  of 
naturalization,21  registration,  and  voting.22  Reform  legis- 
lation and  independence  emphasize  the  individual  candidate 
at  the  expense  of  the  organization ;  but  fixing  the  attention 
on  an  individual  brings  into  relief  not  so  much  his  past 
record  and  political  opinions  as  those  things  which  we  asso- 
ciate more  closely  with  personality,  race,  religion,  and 
economic  and  social  classification.  If  party  organizations 
crumble,  new  groupings  may  appear  based  on  more  personal 
elements  and  on  horizontal  cleavages.  These  considera- 
tions throw  light  on  the  significance  of  bipartisanship  and 
vote-swapping  and  on  those  personal  machines  which  have 
to  a  great  extent  in  Detroit  taken  the  place  of  the  party 
organizations. 

Under  the  convention  system  the  demands  of  party 
strategy  in  the  making  of  nominations  tended  to  distribute 
candidates  around  the  county  or  State,  or  in  the  case  of  a 

20  F.  J.  Goodnow,  Municipal  Government,  pp.  379-380. 

21  See  above,  page  130. 
12  See  above,  page  143. 


619]  CONCLUSIONS  183 

district  to  alternate  the  nominations  from  one  county  in 
the  district  to  another.  The  result  was  to  accentuate  the 
evils  of  the  district  system,  for  the  problem  which  the  con- 
vention faced  was  to  nominate  a  resident  of  a  particular 
subdivision  of  the  district.  In  nominating  a  particular 
state  officer  the  convention  did  not  look  for  the  most 
available  man  in  the  State,  but  merely  for  the  most  available 
man  in  the  upper  peninsula  or  in  Wayne  County.  Under 
the  direct  primary  the  system  of  sectional  candidacy  is  to 
some  extent  done  away  with ;  and  in  place  of  the  appeal  to  a 
section  there  is  likely  to  be  an  appeal  to  the  dominant  race 
or  economic  class  in  the  district,  and  hence  a  tendency  to 
accelerate  the  crystallization  of  personal,  racial,  and  class 
groups.  While  this  tendency  is  diametrically  opposed  to 
homogeneity  as  well  as  to  strong  organization,  it  does  at 
least  obviate  one  of  the  reasons  for  the  existence  of  inferior 
candidates. 

Minor  Changes  and  Tendencies. — A  survey  of  the  last 
quarter  of  a  century  reveals  in  primaries  and  campaigns  a 
less  excitable,  more  orderly,  more  self-controlled,  and  at  the 
same  time  a  more  individualistic  and  apparently  more  alert 
citizen  body  than  existed  in  previous  years.  The  pic- 
turesque element  has  largely  vanished,  and  conditions  in- 
cident to  nominations  and  elections  are  no  longer  demoral- 
izing. To  compensate  for  the  diminished  educational 
features  of  the  electoral  campaign  the  prenomination  cam- 
paign has  become  more  educational.  In  answer  to  the 
contention  that  weak  organization  and  independence  cause 
public  indifference  and  a  decrease  in  voting,  a  careful 
comparison  of  the  returns  shows  that  in  the  primaries  the 
vote  has  increased,  and  in  the  election  no  decrease  is  clearly 
apparent. 

Further  Legislation. — Experimentation  has  shown  the  in- 
adequacy of  mere  machinery  to  make  effective  a  priori 
principles,  and  it  has  also  shown  the  danger  that  in  some 
cases  the  remedy  may  be  worse  than  the  disease.  The 
system  of  legislative  regulation  will  need  the  continued 
application  of  corrective  and  remedial  provisions.  If  the 


184  PARTY  ORGANIZATION   IN   MICHIGAN  [620 

present  tendencies  are  to  be  accepted,  the  primary  should  be 
open ;  the  office-column  ballot  should  be  substituted  for  the 
party-column;  the  provisions  prohibiting  fusion  should  be 
repealed;  the  merit  system  should  be  inaugurated  for  state 
and  municipal  employes;  and  the  short  ballot  should  be 
adopted. 

The  most  interesting  and  most  difficult  inquiry  is  that 
which  concerns  itself  with  the  quality  of  candidates.  In 
addition  to  the  nominating  system  there  are  other  influences 
which  affect  the  quality  of  candidacies;  for  example,  the 
appurtenances  of  the  office  sought, — its  powers,  respon- 
sibilities, compensation,  tenure,  and  public  estimation; 
and  if  party  organizations  continue  to  lose  strength, 
these  factors  must  assume  in  the  future  greater  relative 
importance  than  they  have  had  in  the  past.  To  create  in 
the  electorate  a  social  feeling  which  shall  take  the  place  of 
partisanship  and  inspire  an  active  and  intelligent  partici- 
pation in  nominations  and  elections,  to  educate  the  voter 
to  view  his  ballot  with  an  impersonal,  objective,  impartial 
mind, — these  are  tasks  which  are  fundamental  to  thorough- 
going reform;  but  for  their  performance  something  more  is 
required  than  the  devising  of  machinery  or  the  imposing  of 
penalties. 


INDEX 


Absentee  voting,  158. 
Accounting,  campaign,  147-148. 
Advertising,  campaign,  143,  153, 

154- 

Alpena  County,  direct  primary  in, 
61,  63-65,  77. 

Alward,  D.  E.,  83. 

American  Protective  Association, 
12-13. 

Ann  Arbor,  38. 

Assessment  of  office-holders,  72, 
115,  116,  135-136;  of  candi- 
dates, 134-135- 

Assisted  voting,  124,  161-163. 

Associated  Democratic  Press  of 
Michigan,  154. 

Ballot,  in  the  primaries,  36;  in 
the  direct  primary,  63  ff.,  69, 
76;  short,  124,  176-177,  184; 
marking  of,  161-164;  party- 
column,  180-181,  184;  office- 
column,  180-181,  184. 

Battle  Creek,  56. 

Beck  v.  Board,  484  ff . 

Bipartisanship,  117,  162-164. 

Bliss,  A.  T.,  59. 

Boushaw,  Billy,  160. 

Bradley,  J.  B.,  108. 

Breitmeyer,  Mayor,  no. 

Bribery.     See  Corruption. 

Bryan,  W.  J.,  18,  150,  160. 

Burrows,  Senator,  in. 

Calhoun  County,  128,  135,  146. 

Campaign  finance,  133  ff. 

Campaign  fund,  sources  of,  134  ff.; 
publicity  of,  138  ff.;  expenditure 
of,  141  ff.;  accounting  for,  147- 
148. 

Campaign  management,  84,  126  ff. 

Campaign  of  1896,  149,  152,  153. 

Campaigns,  primary,  92;  election, 
126  ff.;  management  of,  126  ff. ; 
length  of,  132;  finances  of,  134 
ff.;  speaking  in,  149-152;  dem- 
onstrations in,  153;  social  ele- 
ment in,  155. 

Campau,  D.  J.,  18,  89,  119,  148 
(note),  156. 


Candidates,  dummy,  52,  107,  108, 
124;  relation  to  party  manager, 
78-81,  83,  92;  primary  cam- 
paign of,  92-93;  primary  ex- 
penses of,  93-99;  character  of, 
107-113,  184;  assessment  of, 
134-135;  campaign  expenses  of, 
145;  as  speakers,  149-150;  cam- 
paign activities  of,  153-156. 

Canvasses,  156. 

Cass  County,  64. 

Catholics,  12-13,  142. 

Chairman,  temporary,  45  ff.,  86- 
87. 

Challengers,  162-163. 

Chandler,  Zachariah,  15,  16. 

Chippewa  County,  106. 

City  committee,  organization  of, 
29-30;  under  direct  primary, 
77-78;  in  campaigns,  126-127. 

Civil  service  reform,  114,  136,  184. 

Clark,  Champ,  87. 

Clubs,  81,  128-130,  149,  157. 

Colby,  Representative,  57. 

Committee  on  credentials,  46  ff . 

Committee  on  permanent  organ- 
ization, 50-51. 

Committees,  general  features  of, 
22-24;  ward,  25;  township,  25; 
county,  25-27;  state  central, 
27-28;  congressional  district, 
29;  senatorial  district,  29;  repre- 
sentative district,  29;  judicial 
circuit,  29;  city,  29-30;  in 
conventions,  43,  46,  50-51; 
under  the  direct  primary,  59, 
63,  64,  66,  76  ff.;  in  campaigns, 
126  ff.,  150,  156.  See  also 
State  central  committee,  Town- 
ship committee,  etc. 

Congressional  district  committee, 
29,  78, 126-128. 

Congressional  districts,  in  con- 
ventions, 43. 

Connolly,  W.  F.,  89. 

Contested  delegations,  in  con- 
ventions, 47-50,  118-119;  the 
courts  and,  48-50,  86;  in  1912, 
85-87. 

Contributions  in  direct  primary, 


185 


1 86 


INDEX 


[622 


71;  in  campaigns,  136,  138-139, 
147. 

Controlled  precincts,  100-101, 
106-107,  Ir7»  159-^64. 

Conventions,  legislation  affecting, 
30;  number  of,  39-40;  county, 
40-42,  85;  state,  42-44,  85-87; 
committees  in,  43,  46,  50-51; 
district,  44;  preliminary  organ- 
ization of,  45-50,  86-87;  control 
of,  45  ff.,  85;  delegates  to,  50; 
order  of  business  in,  51;  con- 
ditions in,  51  ff.,  86,  118,  119; 
corruption  in,  52-54;  and  direct 
primary  legislation,  56,  58,  62- 
63,  66,  72-76,  85,  92;  and 
nominations,  110-112;  under 
direct  primary,  114,  118-125. 
See  also  County  convention, 
State  convention,  etc. 

Corporations,  54,  139,  146. 

Corrupt  practice  acts,  39,  53,  66, 
68-69,  94,  99,  139,  144,  H7, 
154,  158. 

Corruption  in  primaries,  39;  in 
conventions,  52-54;  under  direct 
primary,  81,  92,  99,  125;  in 
campaigns,  139-142,  146-147, 
158-164. 

County  committee,  organization 
of,  25-27;  officers  of,  25-26, 
78,  80-81,  127-128;  chairman 
of,  26-27,  ?8,  80-8 1 ;  under 
direct  primary,  77-80;  in  cam- 
paigns, 126-129,  I32,  134,  148, 
150. 

County  convention,  call  for,  40- 
41;  delegates  to,  41;  voting  in, 
41;  under  the  direct  primary, 
85,  92,  125. 

Crampton,  L.  C.,  164. 

Credentials,  committee  on,  46,  49; 
of  delegates,  46-50,  118-119, 
125;  of  challengers,  162-163. 

Dame,  G.  M.,  83. 

Democratic  voting  in  Republican 
primaries,  66-67,  69,  103-107, 
116-117,  121-122. 

Democrats,  and  Populists,  13,  19, 
54;  and  Prohibition  party,  14, 
54-55;  and  Silver  Republicans, 
J9,  54-55;  and  direct  primary 
legislation,  73. 

Demonstrations,  153  ff. 

Detroit  Citizens'  League,  159,  164. 

Detroit,  illiteracy  in,  1 1 ;  primaries 


in,  34  ff.;  corruption  in,  53  ff.; 
and  direct  primary  legislation, 
56-58;  party  officials  from,  84- 
85;  direct  primary  in,  95,  99, 
100-103,  106-110;  bipartisan 
machine  in,  117,  161-164,  177~ 
178;  primaries  in,  118-120;  long 
ballot  in,  124;  campaign  organ- 
ization in,  126-127,  130-133; 
campaigns  in,  155,  158-164; 
vote  in,  167-168. 

Dickinson,  Don  M.,  18. 

Direct  primary,  in  operation,  91 
ff.;  campaign,  92-93;  expenses, 
93-99;  petitions,  99;  vote  in, 
99-107;  nominations  by,  107- 
113;  and  newspapers,  113;  and 
the  party  organization,  113- 
118;  and  conventions,  118-121, 
125;  tendencies  of,  121-125. 

Direct  primary  legislation,  history 
of,  56  ff.;  local,  56-66,  72;  gen- 
eral, 61-69,  72;  corrupt  prac- 
tices in,  69-72;  revision  of,  74; 
and  committees,  77  ff. 

District  committees  under  direct 
primary,  78. 

District  conventions,  44. 

Doremus,  Congressman,  117. 

Dutch,  12. 

Earle,  H.  S.,  108. 

Election  board,  163-164. 

Elections,  dates  of,  24;  vote  in, 
15-16,  166  ff. 

Expenditures,  in  direct  primary, 
70-72,  93-99,  12 1 ;  in  primaries, 
119,  120;  limitation  of,  124, 
140;  in  campaigns,  138-147. 

Factionalism,  116. 

Farmers,  12,  57,  59-60,  112. 

Farmers'  Alliance,  13. 

Ferris,  W.  N.,  68,  76  (note),  88, 

95,  108  (note),  no,  181. 
Finance,  campaign,  133  ff. 
First  voters,  130. 
Ford,  Henry,  68  (note). 
Foreign-born,  10,  II,  12,  100,  101, 

103,  112,  113,  160,  161,  167, 182. 
Fusion,  54-55,  65,  184. 

Germans,  12. 
Gogebic  County,  n. 
Gold  Democrats,  13,  19,  151. 
Grand  Rapids,  direct  primary  in, 
58,  75,  77,  101,  102,  108,  109, 


623] 


INDEX 


I87 


120,  121 ;  clubs  in,  130;  cam- 
paigns in,  159;  municipal  parties 
in,  i 80. 

Greenback  party,  13. 

Groesbeck,  A.  J.,  83,  87  (note), 
95,98,  H3  (note). 

Hamilton,  E.  L.f  ill. 
Harmon,  Judson,  87. 
Headquarters,  campaign,  131-132. 
Hemans,  L.  T.,  160. 
Houghton  County,  n. 

Illiterates,  u,  100,  101,  103,  160, 

161,  162,  167. 

Independent  newspapers,  14-15. 
Independent  voting,  107,  151,  165, 

171,  179-181. 
Independents,  nomination  of,  59, 

74,  1 80;  enrollment  of,  66. 
Ingham   County,   direct   primary 

in,  96-97,  105,  106;  campaigns 

in,  135,  146  (note). 
Instructed  delegations,  51,  125. 
Intimidation,  71. 
Ionia  County,  135. 
Irish,  12. 

Jennings  v.  Board,  21. 
Judicial  circuit  committee,  29,  78, 
128. 

Kalamazoo  County,  39. 

Kent  County,  primaries  in,  34; 
conventions  in,  41;  direct  pri- 
mary in,  58,  60,  64,  74-75, 
77,  100-104,  106;  campaigns 
in,  158  (note);  vote  in,  167- 
168. 

Keweenaw  County,  1 1 . 

King,  Paul  H.,  83,  85,  86. 

Knox,  W.  F.,  83,  85,  86. 

Lansing,  40,  131. 

League  of  Michigan  Municipali- 
ties, 60. 
Literature,  campaign,  153-154. 

McCombs,  W.  F.,  87. 

McGraw,  Batty,  163. 

McKay,  J.  D.,  119. 

McMillan,  James,  16,  17,  26,  ill, 

148  (note). 
Marsh,  P.  W.,  159. 
Martindale,   F.   M.,  95,   98,    113 

(note). 
Michigan  Central  Railroad,  54, 138. 


Michigan  Club,  130,  149,  157. 

Michigan,  general  conditions  in, 
9  ff.;  population,  9;  foreign- 
born,  10;  illiteracy,  n;  section- 
alism, II. 

Michigan  Political  Science  Asso- 
ciation, 57,  60. 

Michigan  Republican  Editorial 
Association,  82,  154. 

Michigan  Republican  Newspaper 
Association,  147. 

Monroe  County,  142. 

Murfin,  Judge,  119. 

Muskegon  County,  60,  64,  77. 

National    committee,     127,    133, 

150,  153- 

National  committeeman,  28-29, 
68-69,  82  (note),  87-90,  119, 
127. 

Naturalization,  130-131,  142. 

Negro,  u. 

Newspapers,   14,  71-73,  82,   113, 

151,  154-155. 
Nominations,  convention,  41-44, 

52,  100-112;  direct  primary, 
62,  65,  66,  75-76,  79-80,  91  ff., 
107-113,  121-124;  minority, 
108,  118,  124;  theory  of,  175- 
176. 
Non-partisanship,  31-32,  177-181. 

Osborn,  C.  S.,  18,  67,  83,  92,  95, 
106,  113  (note),  115,  116,  154 
(note). 

Owens,  P.  K.,  no. 

Parades,  152. 

Parties,  economic  makeup  of,  n- 
12;  racial  composition  of,  12; 
third,  13,  14,  19,  172-173; 
strength  of,  14-16,  96-97;  tra- 
ditions of,  15;  leadership  of, 
16-^19;  legal  status  of,  19-22; 
legislation  affecting,  169-171; 
popular  attitude  toward,  178  ff. 

Partisanship,  31,  137,  151,  165, 
171,  178,  179- 

Party  enrollment,  34-35,  62,  63, 
65,  68,  69,  76,  103-107,  123, 132. 

Party  organizations,  legal  status 
of,  19-22;  definition  of,  21-22; 
general  features  of,  22-24;  rules 
of,  23;  coordination  of,  23,  30, 
126  ff.,  150,  156;  committees 
and  officers  of,  25-30;  and  the 
direct  primary,  76,  113  ff.; 


i88 


INDEX 


[624 


weakening  of,  83,  84,  114-118, 

121,     181-183;    in    campaigns, 

126    ff.;    finances    of,    133    ff.; 

legislation    affecting,     169-171, 

183;  oligarchical  tendencies  in, 

171-177. 
Patronage,  16,  18,  26,  28-29,  53. 

87-89,  176. 

People  v.  Hurlbut,  19-20. 
People's  party,  13,  19,  173. 
Petitions,  80,  81,  93,  99. 
Pierce,  Charles  S.,  83. 
Pingree,  H.  S.,  17,  57-58,  74,  165. 
Platform,  75,  123. 
Pole-raisings,  152. 
Polling-place,  91,  92,  165. 
Precinct  primaries,  30,  34. 
Precincts,  organization  in,  22,  25, 

156-157;    controlled,     106    ff., 

159-164. 

Preferential  ballot,  68,  76,  124. 
Preprimary  convention,   122-124. 
Presidential    preference    primary, 

67-68. 
Primaries,     legislation    affecting, 

30  ff.;  call  for,  31-32;  times  of, 

32-33;  organization  of,  33-34, 

120;    registration    for,    34-35; 

voting  in,  35-38;  corruption  in, 

39,   119,    120;  expenditures  in, 

119,  120. 
Progressive    Democratic    League, 

88. 
Progressives,   86,    103,    123,    139, 

1 80. 
Prohibition,  14  (note),  99  (note), 

1 80. 
Prohibition   party,    14,    173   (and 

note). 
Proxies,  50. 
Publicity    of    campaign    finance, 

138  ff- 

Ratification  meetings,  152. 

Registration,  130-131. 

Religion  in  politics,  12-13. 

Representative  district  commit- 
tees, 29. 

Republican  primary  plan,  122-124. 

Republicans,  and  Populists,  13; 
and  Prohibition  party,  14. 

Rich,  Governor,  141. 

Roosevelt,  Theodore,  67-68,  150. 

Royal  Ark,  161. 

Rural  counties,  primary  vote  of, 
100-103;  graft  in,  159;  election 
vote  in,  167-168. 


Saloons,  political  influence  of,  14, 
53;  and  primaries,  32;  and 
elections,  69;  and  the  direct 
primary,  99,  100  (note);  in 
campaigns,  155,  159,  160-164. 

Scandinavians,  12. 

School-districts,  organization  in, 
22,  156,  157. 

Senatorial  district  committee,  29. 

Shields,  E.  C.,  84  (note),  87,  88. 

Shields  v.  Jacobs,  20. 

Short  ballot,    124,    176-177,   184. 

Silver  Republicans,  13,  19. 

Smith,  W.  A.,  18,  68  (note). 

Social  campaigning,  155. 

Socialism,  151. 

Socialist  Labor  party,  173  (note). 

Socialist  party,  173  (and  note). 

Socialists,  176  (note). 

Speaking,  campaign,  149-152. 

State  Association  of  Farmers' 
Clubs,  60. 

State  central  committee,  powers 
of,  27;  composition  of,  27,  82; 
officers  of,  27-28,  82-87,  127; 
chairman  of,  27-28,  83-88,  127; 
and  credentials,  46-50,  85,  88; 
legislation  affecting,  68,  81-82; 
and  the  direct  primary,  122- 
124;  in  campaigns,  127,  133, 

138-139.  144,  147,  H9-I50,  156. 

State  convention,  call  for,  42; 
delegates  to,  42-43,  125;  com- 
mittees in,  43,  46,  50-51;  nomi- 
nations, 43-44,  52;  temporary 
chairman  of,  45-46,  85-87; 
credentials  in,  46-48,  85-87; 
contests  in,  47-48,  85-87;  order 
of  business  in,  51;  conditions  in, 
52,  86,  125;  selection  of  state 
central  committee  by,  82 ;  under 
the  direct  primary,  85,  125. 

State  convention  of  Fremont 
voters,  60. 

State  Grange,  60. 

State  League  of  Republican  Clubs, 
60,  127. 

Stearns,  J.  S.,  55. 

Stephenson  v.  Board  of  Election 
Commissioners,  20-21. 

Taft,  W.  H.,  150,  160,  165. 
Taft- Roosevelt   contest   of    1912, 

85-87,  119-120. 
Third  parties,  13,  14,  19,  52. 
Ticket-splitting,  165. 
Todd,  A.  M.,  54. 


INDEX 


189 


Townsend,  Charles,  18,  109,  in. 

Township  committee,  organiza- 
tion of,  25;  under  the  direct 
primary,  77;  in  campaigns,  128, 

143,  157- 
Tuscola  County,  64. 

Unit  rule,  51,  125. 

Upper  peninsula,   party  strength 

in,     16;    attitude    of,    toward 

direct    primary,     60,     61,     64; 

enrollment  in,  104;  nominations 

in,  112-113;  controlled  vote  in, 

160. 
Urban  counties,  primary  vote  of, 

1 00-102;  election  vote  of,  167- 

168. 

Vote,  in  primaries,  36-38;  in  the 
direct  primary,  99-107;  as- 
sisted, 124;  getting  out  the, 
157-158;  delivering  the,  158- 
164;  in  elections,  166  ff. 

Vote-Swappers'  League,  117. 

Voters,  independent,  107,  151, 
165;  lists  of,  132;  doubtful, 
132,  166;  absentee,  158,  166. 


Ward  committee,  25,  77. 

Warner,  F.  M.,  64,  94,  108. 

Washtenaw  County,  direct  pri- 
mary in,  59,  96-97,  105-106; 
campaigns  in,  146  (note),  157. 

Wayne  County,  direct  primary  in, 
57,  59-61,  64,  74-75,  77-78, 
100-103,  106,  108,  109;  com- 
mittees in,  81,  126-127;  bi- 
partisan machine  in,  117,  161 
ff. ;  conventions  in,  118,  119; 
campaign  organization  in,  126- 
128;  clubs  in,  130;  campaign 
finance  in,  135,  140  (note),  141, 
143  (note),  145,  146;  campaigns 
in,  150,  157;  election  vote  in, 
167-168. 

Wilson,  Woodrow,  67-68,  87,  88, 
150. 

Wilson-Harmon  contest  of  1912, 
1 20. 

Wilson  men,  original,  87-89. 

Wood,  E.  O.,  84  (note),  87,  88, 
89,  90. 

Workers,  political,  70,  92,  94,  99, 
128,  141,  147,  156-164. 

Yaple,  Judge,  m. 


Johns  Hopkins  University  Studies 

in  Historical  and  Political  Science 


The  University  Studies  will  continue  to  publish,  as  heretofore, 
the  results  of  recent  investigations  in  History,  Political  Economy, 
and  Political  Science. 

The  titles  given  below  are  now  announced  ;  other  numbers  will 
follow  from  time  to  time. 


The  Virginia  Committee  System  and  the  American  Revolution.    By 
JAMES  MILLER  LEAKS.    $1.00;  cloth  $1.25. 

The  Organizability  of  Labor.    By  WILLIAM  O.  WEYFORTH,  Jr.    $1.50; 
cloth  $1.75. 

Party  Organization  and   Machinery   in  Michigan  since  1890.     By 

ABTHUB  C.  MILLSPAUGH.    $1.00,  cloth  $1.25. 

The  Japanese  Judiciary.    By  T.  YOKOYAMA. 

The   Arbitral    Determination   of  Railway   Wages.     By   J.    NOBLE 
STOCKETT,  Jr. 

Unemployment  and  American  Trade  Unions.    By  DAVID  P.  SMELSEB, 
Jr. 

Sumptuary  Legislation  in  Niirnberg  at  the  Period  of  the  Reformation. 

By  K.  EGBERTS  GREENFIELD. 

French  Protestantism  on  the  Eve  of  the  Religious  Wars,  1559-1562. 

By  C.  GUYEB  KELLY. 

The  National  Debt  of  Japan.    By  8.  KITASAWA. 
The  Standard  of  Living  in  Japan.    By  K.  MORIMOTO. 


The  cost  of  subscription  for  the  regular  annual  series,  comprising 
about  600  pages,  is  $3.50.  Single  numbers,  or  special  monographs, 
at  special  prices.  Complete  contents  of  previous  volumes  given  on 
pages  ix-xn. 


STUDIES  IN  HISTORY,  ECONOMICS 
AND  PUBLIC  LAW 

EDITED  BY 

THE  FACULTY  OF  POLITICAL  SCIENCE  OF 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


RECENT   NUMBERS 


VOLUME  LXVI,  1915.    655  pp.    Price,  cloth,  $4.50. 

1.  [158]  *The  Recognition  Policy  of  the  United  States. 

By  JULIUS  GOEBEL,  JR.,  Ph.D. 

2.  (1591  Railway  Problems  in  China. 

3.  [160]  *The  Boxer  Rebellion. 


[161] 
[162] 


By  CHIH  Hsu.  Ph.D. 
By  PAUL  H.  CLEMENTS,  Ph.D. 
538  pp.    Price,  cloth,  $4.00. 
By  JULIUS  F.  HECKER,  Ph.D. 


[163] 

1.  [164] 

2.  [165] 

[1661 
1.  [167] 

1.  [168] 

[169] 
[170] 

[171] 
[172] 
[173] 
[174] 
[175] 


VOLUME  LXVn,  1916. 
*Russian  Sociology. 
State  Regulation  of  Railroads  in  the  South. 

By  MAXWELL  FERGUSON,  A.M.,  LL.B. 
VOLUME  LXVra,  1916.    518  pp.    Price,  cloth,  $4.50. 
The  Origins  of  the  Islamic  State.  By  PHILIP  K.  Him,  Ph.D. 

VOLUME  LXIX,  1916.     489  pp.     Price,  cloth,  $4.00. 
Railway  Monopoly  and  Rate  Regulation. 

By  ROBERT  J.  MCFALL,  Ph.D. 
The  Butter  Industry  in  the  United  States. 

By  EDWARD  WIEST,  Ph.D. 

VOLUME  LXX,  1916.    540  pp.    Price,  cloth,  $4.50. 
Mohammedan  Theories  of  Finance.    By  NICOLAS  P.  AGHNIDES,  Ph.D. 

VOLUME  LXXI,  1916.     476  pp.     Price,  cloth,  $4.00. 
The  Commerce  of  Louisiana  during  the  French  Regime,  1699-1763. 
By  N.  M.  MILLER  SURREY.  Ph.D. 
VOLUME  LXXII,  1916.     542  pp.    Price,  cloth,  $4.50. 
American  Men  of  Letters:  Their  Nature  and  Nurture. 

By  EDWIN  LEAVITT  CLARKE,  Ph.D. 

The  Tariff  Problem  in  China.  By  CHIN  CHU.  Ph.D. 

The  Marketing  of  Perishable  Food  Products.     By  A.  B.  ADAMS,  A.M. 

VOLUME  LXXIII,  1916.    616  pp.    Price,  cloth,  $4.50. 
The  Social  and  Economic  Aspects  of  the  Chartist  Movement 

By  FRANK  F.  ROSENBLATT,  Ph.D. 
The  Decline  of  the  Chartist  Movement. 

By  PRESTON  WILLIAM  SLOSSON,  Ph.D. 
Chartism  and  the  Churches.  By  H.  U.  FAULKNER,  Ph.D. 

VOLUME  LXXIV,  1916. 
The  Rise  of  Ecclesiastical  Control  in  Quebec. 

By  WALTER  A.  RIDDELL,  Ph.D. 


Price. 
Price, 
Price, 

Price. 


$2.00. 
$1.50. 
$2.00. 


$2.30. 
$1-75- 
Price,  $4.00. 


Price. 


Price,  $2.00. 
Price,  $2.00. 
Price,  $4.00. 

Price    $3.50. 


Price. 
Price, 
Price, 


$1.50. 
$1.50. 

$I.SO. 


Price,  $2.00. 


Price, 
Price, 


Price, 


Political  Opinion  in  Massachusetts  during  Civil  War  and  Reconstruction. 

By  EDITH  ELLEN  WARE,  Ph.D.     Price, 


$2.00. 
$1.25. 


$1.75- 
$i-7S. 


The  price  for  each  volume  is  for  the  set  of  monographs  hi  paper.  Each  volume,  as  well 
u  the  separate  monographs  marked  *,  can  be  supplied  in  cloth-bound  copies  for  fifty  cents 
additional.  All  prices  are  net. 

The  set  of  seventy-three  volumes,  comprising  monographs  1-173  is  offered  bound  for 

$246,  except  that  Vol.  II  can  be  supplied  only  in  part  and  hi  paper  covers, 

No.  1  of  that  volume  being  out  of  print     Volumes,  III,  IV  and  XXV 

can  now  be  supplied  only  in  connection  with  complete  sets. 

For  further  inf ormation  apply  to 

Prof.  EDWIN  R.  A.  SELIGMAN,  Columbia  University, 
or  to  MESSRS.  LONGMANS,  GREEN  &  CO.,  New  York. 
London:  P.  S.  KING  &  SON,  Ltd.,  Orchard  House,  Westminster. 

ii 


Recent  Additions  to 

Selections  and 
Documents  in  Economics 

READINGS  IN  SOCIAL  PROBLEMS  $2.80 

Edited  by  ALBERT  B.  WOLFE,  University  of  Texas.     804  pages. 
A  study  of  basic  social  problems  of  vital  significance  today.     The  discus- 
sions, critical  but  non-technical,  take  up  problems  of  population,  immigra- 
tion, the  woman  movement  in  its  many  aspects,  the  family,  and  the  race 
problem  in  America,  and  represent  widely  varying  viewpoints. 

SELECTED  READINGS  IN  RURAL  ECONOMICS         $2.80 

Compiled  by   THOMAS   NIXON  CARVER,  Harvard  University.      974 

pages. 

Excellent  material  ordinarily  difficult  of  access,  and  representing  the 
authorship  of  many  leading  authorities  on  the  subject.  Agricultural  History, 
Land  Tenure,  The  Farmer's  Business,  Agrarian  Movements,  Rural  Organ- 
ization and  Marketing,  and  Agricultural  Policy  are  among  the  subjects 
discussed  at  length. 

TRUSTS,  POOLS,  AND  CORPORATIONS  (Rev»ed  Edition)  $2.75 

Edited  by  WILLIAM  Z.   RIPLEY,   Harvard  University,     xxxiii  +  872 
pages. 

Four  hundred  pages  of  new  material  have  been  added  to  this  standard 
work.  The  additions  include  such  cases  of  recent  interest  as  the  National 
Cash  Register  Case,  the  Steel  Corporation  Case  of  June,  1915,  and  the  Key- 
stone Watch  Decision. 

OTHER  VOLUMES 

SELECTED  READINGS  IN  ECONOMICS  $2.25 

Edited  by  CHARLES  J.  BULLOCK,  Harvard  University. 

SELECTED  READINGS  IN  PUBLIC  FINANCE  $2.25 

Edited  by  CHARLES  J.  BULLOCK,  Harvard  University. 

SELECTIONS  FROM  THE  ECONOMIC  HISTORY  OF  THE  UNITED 
STATES,  1765-1860  $2.75 

Edited  by  GUY  STEVENS  CALLENDER,  Sheffield  Scientific  School,  Yale 
University. 

SOCIOLOGY  AND  SOCIAL  PROGRESS  $2.75 

Edited  by  THOMAS  NIXON  CARVER,  Harvard  University. 

TRADE  UNIONISM  AND  LABOR  PROBLEMS  $2.00 

Edited  by  JOHN  R.  COMMONS,  University  of  Wisconsin. 

RAILWAY  PROBLEMS  (Revised  Edition)  $2.50 

Edited  by  WILLIAM  Z.  RIPLEY,  Harvard  University. 


GINN  AND  COMPANY 

Boston        New  York       Chicago        London 


Latest  books  on 

History  and  Economics 

To  Mexico  with  Scott— Letters  of  Capt.  E.  Kirby  Smith 
to  his  Wife 

Prepared  by  his  daughter,  EMMA  J.  BLACKWOOD.    With  an  Introduction 

by  R.  M.  Johnston. 

Surprisingly  modern  after  seventy  years  are  these  observations  of  a  thorough 
soldier  serving  with  both  trained  men  and  volunteers.  Ready  in  June. 

Essays  in  the  Earlier  History  of  American 
Corporations 

By  JOSEPH  S.  DAVIS,  Ph.D.,  Instructor  in  Economics  in  Harvard  Univer- 
sity.   2  volumes.    Each,  $2.50  net. 

Drawn  from  original  sources  of  the  17th  and  18th  centuries.  Volume  I 
contains  papers  on  Corporations  of  the  American  Colonies,  William  Duer, 
Entrepreneur,  1747-99,  and  The  "S.  U.  M." — the  First  New  Jersey  Business 
Corporation.  Volume  II  is  devoted  to  Eighteenth  Century  Business  Cor- 
porations in  the  United  States.  The  work  is  supplied  with  a  classified  bib- 
liography, charts,  and  an  indices.  Harvard  Economic  Studies,  No.  XVI. 

Business  Statistics 

Edited  by  MELVIN  T.  COPELAND,  Ph.D.,  Assistant  Professor  of  Market- 
ing in  Harvard  University.    Graphs,  charts.    $3.75  net. 
Illustrating  the  uses  of  statistics  in  business  and  the  methods  of  obtaining 
them,  this  compilation  forms  a  valuable  addition   to  a  business  man's 
library.    Harvard  Business  Studies,  Volume  III. 

Three  Great  Congresses  of   the  Nineteenth   Cen- 
tury.   Claimants  to  Constantinople 

By   CHARLES   DOWNER   HAZEN,   WILLIAM    ROSCOE   THATER,   ROBERT 
HOWARD  LORD,  and  ARCHIBALD  CART  COOLIDGE.     $.75  net. 
These  papers  deal  with  the  Treaties  of  Vienna,  Paris,  and  Berlin,  and  with 
the  historic  claims  which  national  States  have  successively  made  upon  Con- 
stantinople.   The  present-day  importance  of  these  studies  is  easily  seen. 

The   Military  and   Colonial   Policy  of   the   United 
States 

By  ELIHTJ  ROOT.    Addresses  and  Papers  edited  by  Robert  Bacon  and 
James  Brown  Scott.    $2.50  net. 
A  treatment  of  topics  arising  from  the  Spanish  War  of  1898. 

Latin  America  and  the  United  States 

By  ELIHU  ROOT.     Edited  by  Robert  Bacon  and  James  Brown  Scott. 

$2.50  net. 

Speeches  at  the  Third  International  Conference  of  American  Republics, 
1906,  and  subsequently. 

Order  through  your  dealer 

HARVARD  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

44  RANDALL  HALL  CAMBRIDGE,  MASS. 


Johns  Hopkins  University  Studies 

in  Historical  and  Political  Science 


Studies  in  American  Trade  Unionism,  by  members  of  the  Economic  Seminary 
of  the  Johns  Hopkins  University,  have  been  published  as  follows : 

The  Finances  of  American  Trade    Unions.     By  A.  M.  SAKOLSKI.     Series 

XXIV  (1906),  Nos.  3-4.     Paper,  75  cents. 

National  Labor  Federations  in  the  United  States.     By  WILLIAM  KIRK. 

Series  XXIV  (1906),  Nos.  9-10.     Paper,  75  cents. 
Apprenticeship  in  American  Trade  Unions.     By  J.  M.  MOTLEY.     Series 

XXV  (1907),  Nos.  ii-i2.     Paper,  50  cents. 

Beneficiary  Features  of  American  Trade  Unions.     By  J.   B.   KENNEDY. 

Series  XXVI  (1908),  Nos.  11-12.     Paper,  50  cents. 
The  Trade-Union  Label.     By  E.  R.  SPEDDEN.     Series  XXVIII  (1910),  No.  2. 

Paper,  50  cents;  cloth,  75  cents. 
The  Closed  Shop  in  American  Trade  Unions.     By  F.  T.  STOCKTON.     Series 

XXIX  (1911),  No.  3.     Paper,  $1.00;  cloth,  $1.25. 

The  Standard  Rate  in  American  Trade  Unions.     By  D.  A.  McCABE.    Series 

XXX  (1912),  No.  2.     Paper,  $1.25;  cloth,  $1.50. 

Admission  to  American  Trade  Unions.     By  F.  E.  WOLFE.     Series  XXX 

(1912),  No.  3.     Paper,  $1.00;  cloth,  $1.25. 
The  Government  of  American  Trade  Unions.     By  T.  W.  GLOCKER.     Series 

XXXI  (1913),  No.  2.     Paper,  $1.00;  cloth,  $1.25. 

Jurisdiction  in  American  Building  Trades  Unions.     By  N.  R.  WHITNEY. 

Series  XXXII  (1914),  No.  I.     Paper,  $1.00;  cloth,  $1.25. 
The  Helper  and  American  Trade  Unions.     By  JOHN  H.  ASHWORTH.     Series 

XXXIII  (1915),  No.  3.     Paper,  75  cents;  cloth,  $1.00. 

The  Boycott  in  American  Trade  Unions.     By  LEO  WOLMAN.     Series  XXXIV 

(1916),  No.  I.     Paper,  $1.00;  cloth,  $1.25. 
The  Control  of  Strikes  in  American  Trade  Unions.     By  G.  M.  JANES.     Series 

XXXIV  (1916),  No.  3.     Paper,  75  cents;  cloth,  $1.00. 

The    Organizability  of    Labor.    By  W.  O.  WEYFORTH,  JR.    Series  XXXV 

(1917),  No.  2.     Paper,  $1.50;  cloth,  $1.75. 
Bibliography  of  American  Trade-Union  Publications.     Edited  by  GEORGE 

E.  BARNETT.    Second  edition.     The  Johns  Hopkins  Press,  1907.     Paper, 

75  cents. 

Subscriptions  and  orders  for  single  monographs  should  be  sent  to 

THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  PRESS,  Baltimore,  Md. 


Four  Phases  of  American 
Development 

FEDERALISM-  DEMOCRACY- IMPERIALISM-  EXPANSION 

By  JOHN  BASSETT  MOORE,  LL.D. 

218  Pages.  Crown  8vo.    Cloth.  Price,  $1.50 

The  lectures  embraced  in  this  volume  are  designed  to  sketch  in  clear  and 
vivid  outline  the  great  movements  by  which  the  historical  development  of  the 
United  States  is  distinguished  and  to  indicate  the  causes  to  which  they  were 
due.  The  order  in  which  the  several  topics  are  discussed  is  not  intended  to  de- 
note a  strict  chronological  succession;  hence  they  are  described  as  phases  rather 
than  as  stages  of  development.  While  federalism,  democracy  and  imperialism 
give  a  dominant  impress  to  successive  periods,  yet  expansion  has  characterized 
the  entire  course  of  American  history.  The  misapprehension  so  widely  enter- 
tained, that  imperialism  began  with  the  war  with  Spain  is  corrected.  The  im- 
perialistic tendency,  observable  from  the  beginning,  is  shown  to  have  assumed 
a  specially  pronounced  form  in  the  Civil  War  and  in  the  measures  of  national 
self-preservation  to  which  that  great  conflict  gave  rise. 


The  Diplomacy  of  the  War  of  1812 

By  FRANK  A.  UPDYKE,  Ph.D. 

504  Pages-      Cloth,  $2.50 

The  author  carefully  analyzes  the  diplomatic  correspondence  in  regard  to 
neutral  rights  and  the  impressment  of  seamen  which  preceded  the  War  of  1812. 
The  protests  against  interference  with  neutral  trade  made  by  Presidents  Jef- 
fereon  and  Madison  have  an  unexpectedly  familiar  sound  today.  Then,  as 
now  the  United  States  was  the  principal  neutral  power  in  a  war  which  in- 
volved all  Europe.  The  causes  of  the  War  of  1812  are  clearly  set  forth.  The 
treaty  of  Ghent,  the  hundredth  anniversary  of  which  has  recently  been  cele- 
brated, is  the  central  theme  of  the  latter  half  of  the  volume.  The  negotiations 
leading  to  the  signing  of  that  treaty  are  clearly  described.  The  terms  of  the 
treaty  are  examined  as  well  as  the  questions  in  dispute  which  were  omitted, 
and  which  continued  to  distnib  the  relations  of  the  two  countries  for  many 
years.  In  the  concluding  chapter  each  of  these  disputed  questions  is  traced  to 
its  final  solution. 

THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  PRESS 

BALTIMORE,  MARYLAND 


Diplomatic  Negotiations  of  American 
Naval  Officers,  1778-1883 

By  CHARLES  OSCAR  PAULLIN 
380  Pages.       Cloth,  $2.00 

This  work  presents  a  brief  but  comprehensive  study  of  the  service  of  the  navy 
in  the  field  of  diplomacy,  from  John  Paul  Jones  to  Rear-Admiral  Schufeldt.  The 
naval  officer  as  a  diplomat  was  distinguished  for  simplicity,  candor,  and  direct- 
ness, and  as  his  negotiations  were  for  the  most  part  with  far  distant  oriental 
peoples,  he  was  often  the  first  to  establish  permanent  relations  with  the  United 
States. 

The  story  of  the  negotiations  with  Barbary,  Tripoli,  Algiers  and  other  Mo- 
hammedan states  upon  the  Mediterranean  is  graphically  told,  and  interesting 
chapters  are  devoted  to  the  successful  efforts  of  American  commanders  to  break 
down  the  diplomatic  barriers  of  China,  Japan  and  Korea. 

The  book  is  at  the  same  time  a  contribution  to  the  history  of  the  navy  and 
to  American  diplomatic  history. 


Disturbing  Elements  in  the  Study  and 
Teaching  of  Political  Economy 

By  JAMES  BONAR 

M.A.  (Oxford),  LL.D  (Glasgow) 

156  P&ges.  12mo.  Cloth.  $1.60 

This  volume  consists  of  five  lectures  delivered  at  the  Johns  Hopkins  Uni- 
versity in  the  spring  of  1910. 

As  the  title  suggests,  the  lectures  are  discourses  not  on  economic  error  in  gen- 
eral, but  on  the  more  subtle  fallacies  which  are  apt  to  invade  the  reasoning  of 
trained  economists  in  spite  of  learning  and  discipline.  Such  errors  creep  in  from 
a  popular  political  philosophy  (Lecture  I),  from  want  of  any  political  philosophy 
(II),  from  mistaken  aversion  to  theory  (III),  from  the  shortcomings  of  common 
or  technical  language  (IV),  and  from  the  wrong  handling  of  distinctions  of  time 
(V). 

The  lectures  are  distinguished  by  the  scholarly  tone  and  philosophical  breadth 
that  characterize  Dr.  Bonar's  writings. 

THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  PRESS 

BALTIMORE  MARYLAND 


A  REPRINT  OF 

ECONOMIC  TRACTS 


The  Johns  Hopkins  Press  invites  subscriptions  to  a  reprint  of  four  important 
economic  essays  of  the  seventeenth  century,  to  be  issued  consecutively  under  the 
editorial  direction  of  Professor  Hollander: — 

A  Treatise  of  the  Canker  of  England*  Common  Wealth.     By  GERRARD  DE 

MALYNES.    London,  1601. 

A  Discourse  of  Trade,  from  England  unto  the  East  Indies:  Answering  to 
diverse  Objections  which  are  usually  made  against  the  same.  By  THOMAS 
MUN.  London,  1621. 

The  Treasure  of  Traffike.  Or  a  Discourse  of  Forraigne  Trade.  By  LEWES 
ROBERTS.  London,  1641. 

Brief  Observations  concerning  Trade,  and  Interest  of  Money.     By  JOSIAH 

CHILD.    London,  1668. 

Of  the  tracts  heretofore  reprinted,  a  limited  number  can  yet  be  obtained  as 
follows.  As  the  editions  approach  exhaustion,  the  prices  indicated  are  likely  to 
be  increased  without  notice: — 

Asgill,  "Several  Assertions  Proved"  (London,  1696),  Price,  50  cents. 
Barbon,  "A  Discourse  of  Trade"  (London,  1690),  Price,  50  cents. 
Berkeley,  "The  Querist":  Parts  I,  II,  III  (Dublin,  1735-37),  Price,  $1.00. 
Fauquier,  "An  Essay  on  Ways  and  Means"  (London,  1756),  Price,  50  cents. 
Fortrey,  "Englands  Interest  Considered"  (Cambridge,  1663),  Price,  50  cents. 
Longe,  "A  Refutation  of  the  Wage-Fund  Theory"  (London,  1866),  Price,  $1.00. 

Malthus,  "An  Inquiry  into  the  Nature  and  Progress  of  Rent"  (London,  1815) 
(Out  of  print). 

Massie,  "The  Natural  Rate  of  Interest"  (London,  1750),  Price,  50  cents. 
North,  "  Discourses  upon  Trade"  (London,  1691),  Price,  50  cents. 
Ricardo,  "Three  Letters  on  "The  Price  of  Gold'  "  (London,  1809)  (Out  of  print) 
Vanderlint,  "Money  Answers  All  Things"  (London,  1734),  Price,  $1.00. 
West,  "Essay  on  the  Application  of  Capital  to  Land"  (London,  1815),  Price, 

$1.00. 


THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  PRESS 


BALTIMORE,  MD. 

viii 


JOHNS  HOPKINS  UNIVERSITY  STUDIES 

IN 

HISTORICAL  AND  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 

Edited  by  HERBERT  B.  ADAMS,  1882-1901 

*  Not  sold  separately. 
FIRST   SERIES.— 1883.— $4.00. 
(Volume  sold  only  with   complete  sets.) 

I.  An  Introduction  to  American  Institutional  History.    By'  E.  A.  FREEMAN.    25  cents. 

II.  The  Germanic  Origin  of  New  England  Towns.     By  H.  B.  ADAMS.     50  cents.          v 

III.  Local  Government  in  Illinois.     By  ALBERT   SHAW. — Local  Government  In  Pennsyl- 
vania.    By  E.  R.  L.  GOULD.     30  cents. 

IV.  Saxon  Tithingmen  in  America.    By  H.  B.  ADAMS.     50  cents. 

V.  Local  Government  in  Michigan  and  the  Northwest.    By  E.  W.  BBMIS.     25  cents. 

VI.  Parish  Institutions  of  Maryland.     By  EDWARD  INGLE.     40  cents. 
•VII.  Old  Maryland  Manors.     By  JOHN  HEMSLEY  JOHNSON. 

VIII.  Norman  Constables  in  America.    By  H.  B.  ADAMS.     50  cents. 

IX-X.  Village  Communities  of  Cape  Ann  and  Salem.    By  H.  B.  ADAMS.     50  cents. 

XI.  The  Genesis  of  a  New  England  State.    By  A.  JOHNSTON.    30  cents. 
•XII.  Local  Government  and  Schools  in  South  Carolina.     By  B.  J.  KAMAGH. 

SECOND  SERIES.— 1884. 

(Volume  sold  only  with  complete  sets.) 
•I-II.  Methods  of  Historical  Study.    By  H.  B.  ADAMS. 

III.  The  Past  and  Present  of  Political  Economy.    By  R.  T.  ELY.     85  cents. 

IV.  Samuel  Adams,  the  Man  of  the  Town  Meeting.    By  JAMES  K.  HOSMER.     35  cents. 
V-VI.  Taxation  in  the  "United  States.    By  HENRY  CARTER  ADAMS.    50  cents. 

VII.  Institutional  Beginnings  in  a  Western  State.     By  JESSE  MACY.     25  cents. 
VIII-IX.  Indian  Money  in  New  England,  etc.     By  WILLIAM  B.  WBBDBN.     60  cents. 
•X.  Town  and  County  Government  in  the  Colonies.    By  E.  CHANNINQ. 

•XI.  Eudimentary  Society  among  Boys.    By  J.  HEMSLEY  JOHNSON. 

XII.  Land  Laws  of  Mining  Districts.     By  C.  H.  SHINN.     50  cents. 

THIRD  SERIES.— 1885.— $4.00. 

I.  Maryland's  Influence  upon  Land  Cessions  to  the  U.  S.    By  H.  B.  ADAMS.    75  cents. 
II  III.  Virginia  Local  Institutions.    By  E.  INGLB.     75  cents. 
IV.  Eecent  American  Socialism.     By  RICHARD  T.  ELY.     50  cents. 
V-VI-VII.  Maryland  Local  Institutions.     By  LEWIS  W.  WII.HELM.     $1.00. 

VIII.  Influence  of  the  Proprietors  in  Founding  New  Jersey.    By  A.  SCOTT.     25  cents. 
IX-X.  American  Constitutions.     By  HORACE  DAVIS.     50  cents. 

XI-XII.  The  City  of  Washington.    By  J.  A.  PORTER.    50  cents. 

FOURTH    SERIES.— 1 886. —$4.00. 

•I.  Dutch  Village  Communities  on  the  Hudson  River.     By  I.  ELTINQ. 
II-III.  Town  Government  In  Rhode  Island.    By  W.  E.  FOSTER. — The  Narragansett  Plant- 
ers.   By  EDWARD  CHANNINQ.    50  cents. 

IV.  Pennsylvania  Boroughs.     By  WILLIAM  P.  HOLCOMB.     50  cents. 

V.  Introduction  to  Constitutional  History  of  the  States.     By  J.  F.  JAMESON.     50  cent*. 

VI.  The  Puritan  Colony  at  Annapolis,  Maryland.     By  D.  R.  RANDALL.     50  cents. 
VII-VIII-IX.  The  Land  Question  in  the  United  States.     By  S.  SATO.     $1.00. 

X.  Town  and  City  Government  of  New  Haven.     By  C.  H.  LEVBRMORH.     50  cents. 
XI-XII.  Land  System  of  the  New  England  Colonies,     By  M.  EGLESTON.     50  cents. 

FIFTH  SERIES.— 1887.— $3.50. 
I  II.  City  Government  of  Philadelphia.    By  E.  P.  ALLINSON  and  B.  PENBOSB.    50  cents. 

III.  City  Government  of  Boston.    By  JAMES  M.  BUGBEE.     25  cents. 

IV.  City  Government  of  St.  Louis.     By  MARSHALL  S.  SNOW.     25  cents. 
V-VI.  Local  Government  in  Canada.    By  JOHN  QBOROE  BOURINOT.    50  cents. 

VII.  Effect  of  the  War  of  1812  upon  the  American  Union.    By  N.  M.  BUTLER.     25  cents. 

VIII.  Notes  on  the  Literature  of  Charities.    By  HERBERT  B.  ADAMS.     25  cents. 

IX.  Predictions  of  Hamilton  and  De  Tocqueville.     By  JAMBS  BRYCB.     25  cents. 

X.  The  Study  of  History  in  England  and  Scotland.     By  P.  FRBDBBICQ.     25  cents. 

XI.  Seminary  Libraries  and  University  Extension.     By  H.  B.  ADAMS.     25  cents. 

XII.  European  Schools  of  History  and  Politics.    By  A.  D.  WHITE.     25  cents. 

SIXTH  SERIES.— 1888.— $3.50. 

The  History  of  Co-operation  In  the  United  States. 

SEVENTH  SERIES.— 1889. 

(Volume  sold  only  with  complete  set.) 
I.  Arnold  Toynbee.     By  F.  C.  MONTAGUE.     50  cents. 

II-III.  Municipal  Government  in  San  Francisco.     By  BERNARD  MOSES.     50  cents. 
IV.  Municipal  History  of  New  Orleans.     By  WM.  W.  HOWE.     25  cents. 
•V-VI.  English  Culture  in  Virginia.     By  WILLIAM  P.  TRENT. 

VII-VIII-IX.  The  River  Towns  of  Connecticut.    By  CHARLES  M.  ANDREWS.     $1.00. 
•X-XI-XII.  Federal    Government    in    Canada.     By    JOHN    G.    BOURINOT. 


EIGHTH   SERIES.— 1890. 
(Volume  sold  ooly  with  complete  set.) 

X-XI.  The  Beginnings  of  American  Nationality.     By  A.  W.  SMALL.     $1.00. 
III.  Local  Government  in  Wisconsin.      By  D.  E.  SPENCER.     25  cents. 
•IV.  Spanish  Colonization  in  the  Southwest.     By  F.  W.  BLACKMAR. 
V-VI.  The  Study  of  History  in  Germany  and  France.     By  P.  FBEDEBICQ.     $1.00. 
VII-IX.  Progress  of  the  Colored  People  of  Maryland.     By  J.  R.  BBACKETT.     $1.00. 
•X.  The    Study    of    History    in    Belgium    and    Holland.      By    P.    FEEDERICQ. 
XI  XII.  Seminary  Notes  on  Historical  Literature.    By  II.  B.  ADAMS  and  others.    50  cent*. 

NINTH  SERIES.— 1891. 

(Volume  sold  only  with  complete  set.) 

•l-II.  Government  of  the  United  States.    By  W.  W.  WILLOUGHBY  and  W.  F.  WILLOUGHBT. 
III-IV.  University   Education   in   Maryland.     By   B.    C.    STEINER.      The   Johns   Hopkins 

University   (1876-1891).     By  D.  C.  OILMAN.     50  cents. 
•V-VI.  Municipal  Unity  in  the  Lombard  Communes.     By  W.  K.  WILLIAMS. 
VII-VIII.  Public  Lands  of  the  Roman  Republic.     By  A.  STEPHEN-SON.     75  cents. 
121.  Constitutional  Development  of  Japan.    By  T.  IYENAGA.    50  cents. 
•X.  A  History  of  Liberia.     By  J.  H.  T.  MCPHEBSON. 
XI -XII.  The  Indian  Trade  in  Wisconsin.    By  F.  J.  TURNER.    50  cents. 

TENTH  SERIES.— 1892.— $3.50. 

I.  The  Bishop  Hill  Colony.    By  MICHAEL  A.  MIKKELSEN.     50  cents. 

II-  III.     Church  and  State  In  New  England.     By  PAUL  E.  LAUEB.     50  cents. 

XV.  Chnrch  and  State  in  Maryland.    By  GEORGE  PETBIB.     50  cents. 

V-VI.  Religious  Development  of  North  Carolina.     By  S.  B.  WEEKS.     50  cents. 

VII.  Maryland's  Attitude  in  the  Struggle  for  Canada.     By  J.  W.  BLACK.     50  cents. 
VIII-IX.  The  Quakers  in  Pennsylvania.     By  A.  C.  APPLEGABTH.     75  cents. 

X-XI.  Columbus  and  his  Discovery  of  America.     By  H.  B.  ADAMS  and  H.  WOOD.     50  cents. 
XII.  Causes  of  the  American  Revolution.     By  J.  A.  WOODBDBN.    50  cents. 

ELEVENTH  SERIES.— 1893.— $3.50. 
X.  The  Social  Condition  of  Labor.    By  E.  R.  L.  GOULD.     50  cents. 

II.  The  World's  Representative  Assemblies  of  To-Day.    By  E.  K.  ALDEN.     50  cents. 
III-IV.  The  Negro  in  the  District  of  Columbia.    By  EDWABD  INGLE.    $1.00. 

V-VI.  Church  and  State  in  North  Carolina.     By  STEPHEN  B.  WEEKS.     50  cents. 
VII-VIII.  The  Condition  of  the  Western  Farmer,  etc.     By  A.  F.  BENTLET.     $1.00. 
XX-X.  History  of  Slavery  in  Connecticut.    By  BEBNABD  C.  STEINEB.     75  cents. 
XI-XII.  Local  Government  in  the  South.    By  E.  W.  BEMIS  and  others.    $1.00. 

TWELFTH  SERIES.— 1894.— $3.50. 
I-n.  The    Cincinnati    Southern    Railway.     By    J.    H.    HOLI.ANDEB.     $1.00. ' 

III.  Constitutional  Beginnings  of  North  Carolina.     By  J.  S.  BASSETT.     50  cents. 

IV.  Struggle  of  Dissenters  for  Toleration  in  Virginia.     By  H.  R.  MC!LWAINB.     50  cents. 
V-VT-VII.  The  Carolina  Pirates  and  Colonial  Commerce.     By  S.  C.  HUGHSON.     $1.00. 
VIII-IX.  Representation  and  Suffrage  in  Massachusetts.     By  O.  H.  HATNES.     50  cents. 
X.  English  Institutions  and  the  American  Indian.    By  J.  A.  JAMES.     25  cents. 
XI-XII.  International  Beginnings  of  the  Congo  Free  State.    By  J.  S.  REEVES.    50  cents. 

THIRTEENTH  SERIES.— 1895.— $3.50. 

I-II.  Government  of  the  Colony  of  South  Carolina.    By  E.  L.  WHITNEY.    75  cents. 
III-IV.  Early  Relations  of  Maryland  and  Virginia.    By   J.   H.   LATANE.     50   cents. 

V.  The  Rise  of  the  Bicameral  System  in  America.    By  T.  F.  MOBAN.    50  cents. 
VI-VII.  White  Servitude  in  the  Colony  of  Virginia.     By  J.  C.  BALLAGH.     50  cents. 

VIII.  The  Genesis  of  California's  First  Constitution.     By  R.  D.  HUNT.     50  cents. 

IX.  Benjamin  Franklin  as  an  Economist.     By  W.  A.  WETZEI.     50  cents. 

X.  The  Provisional  Government  of  Maryland.     By  J.  A.  SILVEB.     50  cents. 

XI-XII,  Government  and  Religion  of  the  Virginia  Indians.    By  S.  R.  HENDREN.    50  cents. 

FOURTEENTH  SERIES.— 1896.— $3.50. 

X.  Constitutional  History  of  Hawaii.    By  HENRY  E.  CHAMBERS.     25  cents. 
II.  City  Government  of  Baltimore.     By  THADDEDS  P.  THOMAS.     25  cents. 
XII.  Colonial  Origins  of  New  England  Senates.     By  F.  L.  RILET.     50  cents. 
IV-V.  Servitude  in  the  Colony  of  North  Carolina.     By  J.  S.  BASSETT.     50  cents. 
VI-VII.  Representation  in  Virginia.     By  J.  A.  C.  CHANDLER.     50  cents. 

VIII.  History  of  Taxation  in  Connecticut  (1636-1776).       By  F.  R.  JONES.     50  cents. 
XX-X.  A  Study  of  Slavery  in  New  Jersey.    By  HENKT  S.  COOLET.     50  cents. 
XI-XII.  Causes  of  the  Maryland  Revolution  of  1689.    By  F.  E.  SPABKS.     50  cents. 

FIFTEENTH  SERIES.— 1897.— $3.50. 

X-II.  The  Tobacco  Industry  in  Virginia  since  1860.    By  B.  W.  ABNOLD.    50  cents. 
III-V.  Street  Railway  System  of  Philadelphia.     By  F.  W.  SPEIBS.     75  cents. 

VI.  Daniel  Raymond.     By  C.  P.  NEILL.     50  cents. 

VII-VIII.  Economic  History  of  B.  &  0.  R.  R.     By  M.  REIZENSTEIN.     50  cents. 

IX.  The  South  American  Trade  of  Baltimore.    By  F.  R.  RDTTEB.    50  cents. 

X-XI.  State  Tax  Commissions  in  the  United  States.     By  J.  W.  CHAPMAN.     50  cents. 
XXI.  Tendencies  fa  American  Economic  Thought.    By  8.  SHERWOOD.     25  cents. 

SIXTEENTH  SERIES.— 1898.— $3.50. 
X-XV.  The  Neutrality  of  the  American  Lakes,  etc.    By  J.  M.  CALLAHAN.    $1.25.    Cloth,  $1.50. 

V.  West  Florida.     By  H.  E.  CHAMBERS.     25  cents. 

VI.  Anti-Slavery  Leaders  of  North  Carolina.    By  J.  S.  BASSETT.    50  cents. 
VII-IX.  Life  and  Administration  of  Sir  Robert  Eden.    By  B.  C.  RTEINER.     $1.00. 
X-XI.  The  Transition  of  North  Carolina  from  a  Colony.     By  E.  W.  SIKES.     60  cent*. 
XIX.  Jared  Sparks  and  Alexis  Do  Tocquoville.    By  H.  B.  ADAMS.     25  cents. 


SEVENTEENTH  SERIES.— 1899.— $3.50. 

I-II-III.  History  of  State  Banking  In   Maryland.     By   A.   C.    BBYAN.     $1.00. 
IV-V.  The  Know-Nothing  Party  in  Maryland.    By  L.  F.  SCHMECKEBIBB.    75  cent* 

VI.  The  Labadlst  Colony  in  Maryland.    By  B.  B.  JAMBS.     50  centa. 
VU-VIII.  History  of  Slavery  in  North  Carolina.    By  J.  S.  BASSETT.    76  cents. 
IX-X-XI.  Development  of  the  Chesapeake  &  Ohio  Canal.    By  G.  W.  WABO.     75  centa. 
XII.  Public  Educational  Work  in  Baltimore.    By  HBBBBBT  B.  ADAMS.    25  cent*. 

EIGHTEENTH  SERIES.— 1900.— $3.50. 

X-ZV.  Studies  in  State  Taxation.    Edited  by  J.  H.  HOLLANDER.    Paper,  $1.00 ;  cloth,  $1.25, 
V-YI.  The  Colonial  Executive  Prior  to  the  Restoration.    By  P.  L.  KAYB.    50  centa. 

VII.  Constitution  and  Admission  of  Iowa  into  the  Union.     By  J.  A.  JAMBS.    30  cents. 
VIII-IX.  The  Church  and  Popular  Education.     By  H.  B.  ADAMS.     50  centa. 
X-XIZ,  Religious  Freedom  in  Virginia:  The  Baptists.    By  W.  T.  THOM.     75  cent!. 

NINETEENTH  SERIES.— 1901.— $3.50. 

I-III.  America  in  the  Pacific  and  the  Far  East.    By  J.  M.  CALLAHAN.    75  cents. 

IV-V.  State  Activities  in  Relation  to  Labor.    By  W.  P.  WILLOOQHBY.    50  centa. 

VX-VU.  History  of  Suffrage  in  Virginia.    By  J.  A.  C.  CHANDLBB.     50  centa. 

VIII-IX.  The  Maryland  Constitution  of  1864.    By  W.  S.  MTBBS.    50  centa. 

X.  Life  of  Commissary  James  Blair.    By  D.  E.  MOTLEY.    25  centa. 

XI-XII.  Gov.  Hicks  of  Maryland  and  the  Civil  War.    By  G.  L.  RADCLITFB.    60  cents. 

TWENTIETH    SERIES.— 1902.— 13.50. 

X.  Western  Maryland  in  the  Revolution.     By  B.  C.  STEIXER.     30  centa. 

II-III.  State  Banks  since  the  National  Bank  Act.    By  G.  E.  BAENETT.     50  cents. 

IV.  Early  History  of  Internal  Improvements  in  Alabama.     By  W.  B.  MABTIN.     80  cents. 
•V-VI.  Trust  Companies  in  the  United  States.     By  GEOUGE  CATOB. 

VH-VIII.  The  Maryland  Constitution  of  1851.    By  J.  W.  HABBT.     50  cents. 

IX-X.  Political  Activities  of  Philip  Freneau.     By  S.  E.  FOEMAN.     50  centa. 

XI.-XII.  Continental  Opinion  on  a  Middle  European  Tariff  Union.    By  G.  M.  FISK.    80  cts. 

TWENTY-FIRST  SERIES.— 1903.— $3.50. 

*I-II.  The  Wabash  Trade  Route.     By  E.  J.  BEXTOX. 

III-IV.  Internal  Improvements  in  North  Carolina.     By  C.  C.  WEAVES.     50  centa. 

V.  History  of  Japanese  Paper  Currency.     By  M.  TAKAKI.     30  cents. 

VI-VII.  Economics    and   Politics    in   Maryland,    1720-1750,    and   the   Public    Services    of 

Daniel  Dnlany  the  Elder.     By  ST.  G.  L.  SIOUSSAT.     50  cents. 
•VIII-IX-X.  Beginnings  of   Maryland,    1631-1639.     By   B.   C.   STEINEB. 
XI-XJI.  The  English  Statutes  in  Maryland.    By  ST.  G.  L.  SIOUSSAT.    50  cents. 

TWENTY-SECOND  SERIES.— 1904.— $3.50. 

I-II.  A  Trial  Bibliography  of  American  Trade-Union  Publications.    50  centa. 
Ill  IV.  White  Servitude  in  Maryland,  1634-1880.    By  E.  I.  McCoBMAC.    50  centa. 
V.  Switzerland  at  the  Beginning  of  the  Sixteenth  Century.    By  J.  M.  VINCENT.    30  cents. 
VI-VII- VIII.  The  History  of  Reconstruction  in  Virginia.    By  H.  J.  ECKENBODE.    50  centa. 
IX-X.  The  Foreign  Commerce  of  Japan  since  the  Restoration.     By  Y.  HATTOKI.    50  cents. 
XI-XII.  Descriptions  of  Maryland.    By  B.  C.  STBINBB.    50  cents. 

TWENTY-THIRD  SERIES.— 1905.— 13.50. 

I-II.  Reconstruction  in  Seuth  Carolina.    By  J.  P.  IIOLi.is.     50  cents. 

IH-IV.  State  Government  in  Maryland,  1777-1781.     By  B.  W.  BOND,  JB.     50  cents. 

V-VI.  Colonial  Administration  under  Lord  Clarendon,  1660-1667.    By  P.  L.  KATB.    50  etc. 

VII-VIII.  Justice  in  Colonial  Virginia.    By  O.  P.  CHITWOOD.     50  centa. 

IX-X.  The  Napoleonic  Exiles  in  America,  1815-1819.    By  J.  S.  REEVES.     50  centa. 

XI-XII.  Municipal  Problems  in  Mediaeval  Switzerland.    By  J.  M.  VINCENT.  50  cents. 

TWENTY-FOURTH  SERIES.— 1906.— $3.50. 

I-II.  Spanish-American  Diplomatic  Relations  before  1898.  By  H.  E.  FLACK.  50  cents. 
HI-IV.  The  Finances  of  American  Trade  Unions.  By  A.  M.  SAKOLSKI.  75  centa. 
V-VI.  Diplomatic  Negotiations  of  the  United  States  with  Russia.  By  J.  C.  HILDT.  60  cts. 
Vn-VHI.  State  Rights  and  Parties  in  North  Carolina,  1776-1831.  By  H.  M.  WAQSTAFF.  60c. 
IX-X.  National  Labor  Federations  in  the  United  States.  By  WILLIAM  KIEK.  75  cents. 
XI-XII.  Maryland  During  the  English  Civil  Wars.  Part  I.  By  B.  C.  STEINEB,  50  cents. 

TWENTY-FIFTH  SERIES.— 1907.— $3.50. 

X.  Internal  Taxation  In  the  Philippines.    By  JOHN  S.  HOBO.     30  cents. 
H-III.  The  Monroe  Mission  to  France,  1794-1796.    By  B.  W.  BOND,  Jr.     50  centa. 
IV-V.  Maryland  During  the  English  Civil  Wars,  Part  II.    By  BEBXABD  C.  STBINBB.    60c. 
VI-VII.  The  State  in  Constitutional  and  International  Law.     By  R.  T.  CEAXB.     50  centa. 
VIII-IX-X.  Financial  History  of  Maryland,  1789-1848.     By  HUGH  S.  HANNA.     75  cents. 
XI-XII.  Apprenticeship  in  American  Trade  Unions.    By  J.  M.  MOTLEY.    50  centa. 

TWENTY-SIXTH  SERIES.— igo8.— $3.550. 
I-III.   British  Committees,   Commissions,   Councils  of  Trade  and  Plantations,   1622-1675. 

By  C.  M.  ANDBEWS.     75  cents. 
IV-VI.  Neutral  Rights  and  Obligations  in  the  Anglo-Boer  War.     By  R.  G.   CAMPBELL. 

75  cents. 
VII-VIII.  The  Elizabethan  Parish  in  its  Ecclesiastical  and  Financial  Aspects.     By  8.  L. 

WABB.     50  cents. 
IX-X.  A  Study  of  the  Topography  and  Municipal  History  of  Praeneste.     By  R.  V.  D. 

MAGOFFIN.     50  cents. 
XI-XII.  Beneficiary  Features  of  American  Trade  Unions.     By  J.  B.  KENNEDY.     60  cents. 


TWENTY-SEVENTH   SERIES.— 1909.— $3.50. 

Z-II.  The  Self-Reconstruction  of  Maryland,  1864-1867.     By  W.  8.  MYERS.     50  cents. 
ZII-IY-V.  The    Development   of   the    English   Law   of    Conspiracy.    By    J.    W.    BBYAX. 

75  cents. 
VI-VII.  Legislative    and    Judicial    History    of    the    Fifteenth    Amendment.     By    J.    If. 

MATHBWS.     75  cents ;  cloth  $1. 
VIII-X1I.  England  and  the  French  Revolution,  1789-1797.     By  W.  T.  LAPBADE.     91. 

TWENTY-EIGHTH  SERIES.— 1910.— $3.50. 
(Complete  in  four  numbers.) 

I.  History  of  Beconstruetion  In  Louisiana   (Through  1868).     By  J.  R.  FICKLSN.     fl.OO; 

cloth  $1.25. 

II.  The  Trade  Union  Label.     By  E.  R.  SPEDDEN.     50  cents ;  cloth  75  cents. 

III.  The  Doctrine  of  Non-Suability  of  the  State  In  the  United  States.     By  K.   SINGI- 
WALD.     50  cents ;  cloth  75  cents. 

XV.  David  Bicardo:  A  Centenary  Estimate.     By  J.  IT.  HOLLANDER.     $1.00;  cloth  $1.25. 

TWENTY-NINTH  SERIES.— 1911.— 13.50. 
(Complete  In  three  numbers.) 

I.  Maryland  Under  the  Commonwealth:  A  Chronicle  of  the  years  1649-1658.     By  B.  C. 

STBINER.     $1 ;  cloth  $1.25. 

II.  The  Dutch  Republic  and  the  American  Revolution.     By  FKIEDRICH   EDLEB.     $1.50; 

cloth  $1.75. 
XIX.  The  Closed  Shop  in  American  Trade  Unions.    By  F.  T.  STOCKTON.    $1.00 ;  cloth  $1.25. 

THIRTIETH  SERIES.— 1913.— $3.50. 

(Complete  in  three  numbers.) 

I.  Recent  Administration  In  Virginia.     By  F.  A.  MAGRUDER.     $1.25 ;  cloth  $1.50. 
XI.  The   Standard  Bate  in   America   Trade   Unions.     By    D.   A.    McCABE.     $1.25;    cloth 

$1.50. 
XXI.  Admission  to  American  Trade  Unions.     By  F.  B.  WOLFE.     $1.00;  cloth  $1.25. 

THIRTY-FIRST    SERIES.— 1913.— $3.50. 

(Complete  in  four  numbers.) 

I.  The  Land  System  In  Maryland,  1720-1765.     By  CLAEBNCE  P.  GOULD.     75  cents;  cloth 

$1.00. 

II.  The  Government  of  American  Trade  Unions.     By  T.  W.  GLOCKBH.     $1.00 ;  cloth  $1.26. 

III.  The  Free  Negro  In  Virginia,  1619-1866.     By  J.   II.   RUSSELL.     $1.00;  cloth  $1.25. 
XV.  The  Qnlnquennales :  Aa  Historical  Study.    By  R.  V.  D.  MAGOFFIN.     60  cents;  cloth 

75  cents. 

THIRTY-SECOND  SERIES.— 1914.— $3.50. 

(Complete  In  three  numbers.) 

Z.  Jurisdiction    in    American    Building-Trades    Unions.    By    N.    R.    WHITNEY.     $1.00 ; 
cloth  $1.25. 

II.  Slavery  in  Missouri,  1804-1865.     By  H.  A.  TREXLER.     $1.25 ;  cloth  $1.50. 

III.  Colonial  Trade  of  Maryland.     By  M.  S.  MOBBISS.     $1.00 ;  cloth  $1.25. 

THIRTY-THIRD  SERIES.— 1915.— $3.50. 

(Complete  in  four  numbers.) 

X.  Money    and    Transportation   in   Maryland,    1720-1765.    By    CLARENCE    P.    GOULD.     75 
cents ;  cloth  $1.00. 

II.  The  Financial  Administration  of  the  Colony  of  Virginia.     By  PERCY  SCOTT  FLIPPIN. 

50  cents ;  cloth  75  cents. 

III.  The   Helper   and   American   Trade   Unions.     By   JOHN   H.   ASHWOBTH.     75   cents; 
cloth  $1.00. 

XV.  The  Constitutional  Doctrines  of  Justice  Harlan.     By  FLOYD  BABZILIA  CLARK.     $1.00 ; 
cloth  $1.25. 

THIRTY-FOURTH  SERIES.— 1916.— $3.50. 

(Complete  in  four  numbers.) 
X.  The  Boycott  in  American  Trade  Unions.     By  LEO  WOLMAN.     $1.00 ;  cloth,  $1.25. 

II.  The  Postal  Power  of  Congress.     By  LINDSAY  ROGERS.     $1.00 ;  cloth,  $1.25. 

III.  The  Control  of  Strikes  in  American  Trade  Unions.     By   G.   M.   JANES.     75   cents ; 

cloth.  $1.00. 

IV.  State  Administration  in  Maryland.     By  JOHN  L.  DONALDSON.     $1.00 ;  cloth  $1.25. 


NOTES    SUPPLEMENTARY   TO    THE    STUDIES    IN   HISTORY 
AND  POLITICS. 

PRICK    OF   THESE    NOTES,    TEN    CENTS    NET    EACH,    UNLESS    OTHHRWISB    STATED. 

Municipal  Government  in  England.     By  ALBERT  SHAW. 

Eocial  work  In  Australia  and  London.     By  WILLIAM  GREY. 

Encouragement  of  Higher  Education.     By  H.  B.  ADAMS. 

The  Problem  of  City  Government.     By  SETH  Low. 

Work  Among  the  Working-women  of  Baltimore.     By  H.  B.  ADAMS. 

Charities:   The  Belation  of  the  State,  the  City,  and  the  Individual  to  Modern  Philan- 
thropic Work.     By  A.  G.  WARNER. 

Law  and  History.     By  WALTER  B.  SCAIFB. 

The  Needs  of  Self-Supporting  Women.     By  CLARE  DB  GRAFFBNREID. 

Early  Fresbyterianism  In  Maryland.     By  J.  W.  MclLVAiN. 

The  Educational  Aspect  of  the  U.  S.  National  Museum.     By  O.  T.  MASON. 

University  Extension  and  the  University  of  the  Future.     By  RICHARD  G.  MOULTON. 

The  Philosophy  of  Education.    By  WILLIAM  T.  HARRIS. 

Popular  Election  of  U.  S.  Senators.     By  JOHN  HAYNBS. 

A  Memorial  of  Lucius  8.  Merrlam.    By  J.  H.  HOLLANDER  and  others. 

Is  History  Past  Politics?    By  HERBERT  B.  ADAMS. 

Lay  Sermons.    By  AMOS  G.  WABNKR  ;  with  a  biographical  sketch  by  GBOBOII  B.  HOWA». 
Price  twenty-five  cents. 

xii 


DATE  DUE 


GAYLORD 


PRiNTEO  IN  U.S.A. 


000533711 


